P SUKUMARAN Vs. AMSU

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 he is aggrieved by the judgment dated 11.8.2005 in S.T.No.1011 of 2006(A) of the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-VIII, Thiruvananthapuram, by which the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section 256(1) of the Cr.P.C.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant submitted that the complainant could not appear before the court on the date of the impugned order as he was laid up and to excuse his absence, an application was filed through the counsel for the complainant but the same was rejected by the learned Magistrate, as no medical certificate was produced to substantiate the health ground for his absence. Counsel submits that the complainant was prosecuting the matter effectively and the case was originally filed in the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Thiruvananthapuram, and subsequently transferred to the present trial court. Counsel submits that as the cheque in question covers an amount of Rs.3 lakhs, one more opportunity may be given to the complainant to prosecute the matter on merit.