(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 19.05.2006 in C.C.No. 139 of 2001 of the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sasthamkotta, by which the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section 255(1) of the Cr.P.C.
(2.) THE case of the complainant is that the accused borrowed a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from the Kerala Vyapari Vyavasayi Ekopana Samithi Welfare Scheme and towards the discharge of the said liability, the accused issued Ext.P1 cheque, which when presented for encashment, dishonoured as there was no sufficient funds in the account maintained by the accused. It is the further case that the accused failed to pay the cheque amount in spite of the statutory notice served on the accused. Thus according to the complainant, the accused has committed offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. During the trial of the case, PW1 and 2 were examined and Exts.P1 to P9 were marked. Finally the trial court found that the available prosecution evidences is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused and according to the learned Magistrate, the prosecution failed to prove the case against the accused beyond shadow doubt. Consequently, the accused is found not guilt and thus he is acquitted under Section 255(1) of Cr.P.C. It is the above finding and order of acquittal challenged in this appeal. 2. I have heard Adv.Sri.Babu Thomas.K, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Adv.Sri.Sunny Mathew appearing for the respondent.
(3.) I have carefully considered the contentions advanced by the counsels for the appellant and the respondent.