P C SAJU Vs. RAJESH AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal on special leave has been preferred by the complainant in S.T.C.No.160/2007 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Thalassery, challenging the acquittal of the first respondent/accused under Section 255(1) Cr.P.C.

(2.) The case before the court below is as a result of a private complaint filed by the appellant herein as complainant against the first respondent herein as accused, alleging an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The case of the appellant is that, on 20.12.2005, the first respondent had borrowed an amount of 40,000/- from him, in discharge of which liability, the first respondent issued Ext.P1 cheque. When the cheque was presented, it returned dishonoured for insufficiency of funds in the accounts of the first respondent. On getting back the cheque as dishonoured, statutory notice as contemplated under Section 138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act was issued by the appellant to the first respondent. On receipt of the notice, the first respondent caused to issue a reply notice raising untenable contentions and hence, the complaint.

(3.) On the side of the appellant, PW1 was examined and Exts.P1 to P6 were marked. On the side of the first respondent, DW1 was examined and Ext.D1 was marked. The court below found that the appellant has failed to prove that Ext.P1 cheque was issued by the first respondent to him in discharge of any legally enforceable debt or liability, and consequently, the first respondent was acquitted under Section 255(1) Cr.P.C. through the impugned judgment.