C.Y.PAULOSE Vs. C.Y.ISSAC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant questions the legality and correctness of the judgment passed by the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kolencherry, in S.T.No.70/2008, acquitting the first respondent - accused - holding him not guilty for the offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for brevity, 'N.I. Act').

(2.) The appellant had filed the complaint before the court below, alleging that the first respondent had borrowed an amount of Rs.2,00,000.00 from him and in the discharge of the debt, the first respondent had issued Ext P1 cheque. The cheque on presentation to the bank for collection was returned with an endorsement 'payment stopped by the drawer'. Although the appellant had issued Ext P4 statutory notice, the first respondent failed to pay the demanded amount. Instead, the first respondent sent Ext P7 reply notice alleging that he was not liable to pay any amount. Hence, the first respondent committed the offence under Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act. The first respondent appeared and pleaded not guilty to the substance of the accusation against him. Consequently, the complaint was posted for trial. Trial

(3.) The appellant was examined as PW1 and Exts P1 to P7 were marked in evidence. The first respondent was questioned under Sec. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure(Cr.P.C) and he denied the incriminating circumstances against him. The first respondent got himself and two other witnesses examined as DWs 1 to 3 and marked Exts.D1 to D5 through them.