KHATAL BABU PATHAN Vs. SHAHANAZ AFZAL MUSHRIF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent having been acquitted of the offence punishable under S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'the Act'), the complainant filed this appeal.

(2.) The case of the complainant is that the accused borrowed hand-loan of Rs. 2,50,000/- and in discharge of the said amount, issued a cheque (Ex.P1) and when the cheque presented for encashment was dishonoured on the ground of insufficiency of funds and hence, a legal notice demanding payment of the cheque amount was sent by RPAD and that the accused neither paid the amount nor replied the notice. Therefore, a complaint was presented alleging commission of an offence under the Act. The summons having been served on the accused, she entered appearance and pleaded not guilty. Hence, charge was framed and the case was posted for trial. Complainant got examined as PW-1 and marked five documents. Statement of the accused was recorded under S.313 Cr.P.C. and it is a case of denial. After hearing the learned advocates and finding that the complainant has failed to prove the guilt of the accused, the judgment of acquittal was passed.

(3.) Sri Vishwanath V. Badiger, learned advocate, contended that the learned Magistrate has erred in passing the judgment of acquittal. He submitted that the accused having not adduced any evidence on her behalf and there being credible evidence produced by the complainant, the judgment of acquittal passed being erroneous is liable to be set aside and the respondent convicted for the charged offence.