JOSEPH S/O CHACKO Vs. ABDUL GAFOOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is the complainant in C.C.No.738 of 2001 on the file of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Payyannur, since he is aggrieved by the judgment dated 11/09/2007 of the trial court by which the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C., who faced prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 468 of I.P.C. at the instance of the appellant/complainant.

(2.) THE case of the complainant is that himself and his wife were possessing 2.68 acres of property in R.S.No.119/A1, 1C at Kuttur amsom desom and the said property was sold to the accused for a total consideration of Rs.7,63,800/-, out of which he had paid Rs.2,00,000/- as advance and agreed to pay the balance amount after three months and thus the complainant and his wife agreed to execute the sale deed at the time of payment of the balance amount. Thus an agreement was also executed to that effect. According to the complainant the original of the said agreement was kept with the accused and the complainant was given a photo copy of the same. According to the complainant there was a verbal agreement with the accused that he could tap the rubber trees in the property. It was further agreed that the accused had to pay Rs.1,00,000/- within 30 days of the agreement. Thus according to the complainant, thereafter the accused was possessing the property and tapping the rubber trees thereon. According to the complainant the accused did not pay the amount even after lapse of one month. Therefore the complainant did not allow the accused to tap the rubber trees. According to the complainant the trees were damaged due to the careless tapping. It is also the case that the complainant had paid advance for purchasing another property and the accused thereafter failed to comply with the terms of the agreement.

(3.) ON receiving summons issued from the court, the accused entered appearance and thereafter an enquiry was conducted under Section 244 of Cr.P.C. during which PW.1 was examined and thereafter the accused was heard and a formal charge was framed against him for the said offence and when the said charge read over to him, he denied the same and pleaded not guilty. During the further evidence, PW.1 was cross-examined and PWs.2 to 5 were also examined and Exts.P1 to P4 were marked from the side of the complainant.