A VILASINI Vs. T P RAMLATH AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant in a prosecution for the offence punishable under section 138 of NI Act is the petitioner, who seeks leave of this Court under section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. to file an appeal against the judgment dated 15.11.2012 in S.T.No.3201 of 2010 of the court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kannur, by which the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused under section 255(1) of Cr.P.C.

(2.) The case of the complainant is that the accused borrowed a sum of Rs. 1 lakh from her and towards the discharge of the said liability, the accused issued Ext.P1 cheque, which when presented for encashment, dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds in the account maintained by the accused and the accused has not repaid the amount inspite of statutory notice served on her. Therefore, according to the complainant, the accused has committed an offence punishable under section 138 of the NI Act.

(3.) During the trial of the case, the complainant herself was examined as PW1 and produced Exts.P1 to P5 documents. No evidence either oral or documentary produced from the side of the defence.