M RAVINDRAN Vs. MAHENDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the complainant in S.T.No. 3714 of 1999 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - I, Thrissur against the judgment of acquittal dt.14.1.2002. The first respondent herein was the accused in that case, which was filed by the complainant alleging commission of the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

(2.) THE case of the complainant is briefly as follows. THE first respondent had borrowed a sum of Rs.30,000/- from the appellant/complainant in the first week of June, 1996 for his business purposes, assuring that the amount will be repaid within one year. However, after repeated demands he did not repay the amount. THEreafter the first respondent promised the appellant in May, 1997 that the amount will be paid within another year and issued a post dated cheque dt.3.6.1998 for Rs.30,000/- THE appellant presented the cheque for collection, but the same was returned with a memo stating that payment was stopped by the drawer. THE appellant sent a notice to the accused, which was replied by the first respondent stating false allegations.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the accused is not disputing his signature in Ext.P1 cheque and the complainant has proved all the necessary ingredients of the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. THE benefit of the presumption under Sections 118 and 139 of the N.I. Act is available to the complainant. THE learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the only case of the accused was that he had an earlier transaction with one Madhusoodansn Nair, which was not proved by the accused. THE learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the accused has no consistent case. THE learned counsel for the first respondent supported the judgment of the court below.