GLIGY JAMES Vs. EP ASOKAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE complainant in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the N.I.Act') is the appellant since she is aggrieved by the judgment dated 27.1.2007 in C.C.No.707 of 2001 of the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-Alathur, by which the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section 255(1) of the Cr.P.C.

(2.) THE case of the complainant is that, she is a proprietor dealing in rubber trading and the accused owed a sum of Rs.1,02,750/- to the complainant towards price of rubber sheets purchased by him and thus towards the discharge of the said liability, the accused issued Ext.P2 cheque dated 17.5.2001 which when presented for encashment dishonoured as there was no sufficient fund in the account of the accused and consequently, though a statutory notice served on the respondent/accused, he has not paid the amount and thus the accused has committed the offence punishable under section 138 of NI Act. During the trial of the case, PW1-the husband of the complainant who hold her power of attorney, is examined and Exts.P1 to P11 were marked. Though no witness was examined, Exts.D1 to D4 were marked from the side of the defence, through PW1. Finally, the learned Magistrate has found that the complainant has not made out a case of commission of offence punishable under section 138 of NI Act by the accused and thus he is not found guilty and accordingly he is acquitted under section 255(1) of Cr.P.C. It is the above findings and order of acquittal challenged in this appeal.

(3.) I have carefully considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and I have gone through the evidence and materials on record and also the judgment of the trial court.