THEKKAN AND COMPANY Vs. M ANITHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the complainant in a prosecution under S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, against the acquittal of the respondent / accused by the learned Magistrate.

(2.) The complainant alleged that the accused had borrowed an amount of Rs. 1,75,000/- in two instalments of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 1,25,000/- and had issued Exts. P3 and P4 cheques for the due discharge of the said legally enforceable debt / liability. The said cheques when presented for encashment were dishonoured by the Bank on the ground of insufficiency of funds. The complainant caused registered notices of demand to be issued to the accused as insisted by law. These notices were duly served and acknowledged, but there was no response. No payment was made as demanded. It is in these circumstances that the complainant came to Court with the complaint. In this appeal we are not concerned with the acquittal of the accused in respect of the allegations regarding Ext. P3 cheque. The acquittal in respect of Ext. P4 cheque for Rs.1,25,000/- alone is assailed in this appeal.

(3.) Cognizance was taken. The accused entered appearance. She denied the offence alleged against her. Thereupon the complainant was directed to adduce evidence in support of her case. She examined herself as PW 1 and proved Exts. P1 to P11. On her side the accused examined herself as DW1 and the Manager of the drawee Bank as DW2. Exts. D1 to 3 were marked.