B SURENDRA SHIYAL Vs. MOHAMMED SADIQ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A private complaint was filed by the appellant, under Section 200 Cr.P.C, against the respondent, alleging commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. After recording the sworn statement, the XXI ACMM, Bengaluru, took cognizance of the offence, by registering the complaint as CC No.9638/2013 and issued summons to the accused. Upon appearance, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, when the substance of the accusation was explained and read out to him. During trial, the complainant got himself examined as PW1 and marked six documents. Statement of the accused under Section 313 was recorded and he denied the allegations appeared against him in the evidence of PW1. No defence evidence was adduced. Having regarding to the statements made by the learned advocates and the learned Magistrate having found that in the complaint, it having been stated the accused being a partner of M/S Standard Power Lines and the dishonoured cheque, marked as Ex.P1, having not been issued in the personal capacity of the accused, but having been issued as a partner of M/S Standard Power Lines and the partnership firm having not been made a party ie., after issuance of the demand notice, passed the judgment of acquittal on 01.06.2015. Assailing the said judgment this appeal was filed.

(2.) Heard the learned advocate for the appellant and perused the record.

(3.) According to the complainant, during the month of March 2011, the accused approached him by stating that he being one of the partners of M/S Standard Power Lines, manufacturers and suppliers of HT/LT electrical line materials, having office at Bengaluru and requested to have business transactions and in pursuance thereof, an order was placed for supply of certain electrical items and a cheque dated 11.11.2012 drawn on Amanath Co-operative Bank Limited, main branch at N.R.Road, Bengaluru, marked as Ex.P1, was issued. The said cheque, when presented for encashment, was dishonoured by the bank, with an endorsement "funds insufficient". After notifying the accused with regard to the dishonour of the said cheque and demanding the payment, the cheque amount having not been paid, the aforesaid complaint was presented.