(1.) Heard.
(2.) The order passed by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Erattupetta framing charge against the revision petitioner for the commission of offences punishable under S.420 and 488 IPC is under attack in this revision.
(3.) Learned counsel for the revision petitioner argued strenuously that the Magistrate is not justified in framing charge against the revision petitioner and total dearth of material for presuming that accused (revision petitioner) has committed the offence is the ground projected before me by the learned counsel to call in question the correctness, legality and propriety of the order impugned. He submitted that evidence given by PW 3, who is the accountant of the drawee bank clearly proved that no offence was committed by the revision petitioner.