M.M.RASHEED Vs. FAISAL

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 as he is aggrieved by the order dated 29/06/2007 in C.C.No.29 of 2006 of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Kodungallur by which the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section 255(1) of the Cr.P.C.

(2.) THE case of the appellant/complainant is that the accused issued Ext.P1 cheque for an amount of Rs.75,000/- which when presented for encashment was dishonoured and the amount was not repaid in spite of a statutory notice and therefore the accused committed the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. During the trial of the case the complainant himself was examined as PW.1 and produced Exs.P1 to P6 documents. From the side of the defence DW.1 and DW.2 were examined and Exts.D1 to D6 were marked. THE trial court, after considering the entire evidence and materials, acquitted the accused on the ground that there was no proper notice. It is the above finding and order of acquittal that is challenged in this appeal.

(3.) THOUGH the learned counsel has cited authorities which I indicated earlier the same has no application in the light of the facts and circumstances involved in the present case, which is entirely different from the facts and circumstances involved in those reported decisions.