B.PRASANNA Vs. SATHEESAN Y

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 22.3.2011 in C.C.No.132 of 2009 of the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Kottarakara, by which the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant submitted that the complainant was prosecuting the matter in the trial court effectively and she had filed proof affidavit on 19.1.2011, which returned to the accused and directed to be present on 24.2.2011. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that on 24.2.2011 and on 22.3.2011, ie.,the date on which the impugned order was passed, the complainant could not present in the court in person but she was represented. It is the further submission of the counsel that as the cheque in question covers an amount of Rs.30,000/-, one more opportunity may be given to the complainant.