V.M. MOIDU Vs. RAJOSH N. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals by special leave have been preferred against the acquittal of the accused in S.T.97/2008 and S.T.98/2008 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Nadapuram. The appellant is the defacto complainant in S.T. 97 of 2008 and S.T.98 of 2008 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate II, Nadapuram which was filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Appellant's case in the trial court was that in discharge of a debt of Rs. 4,23,190/-, first respondent issued a cheque for Rs. 2,00,000/- in S.T.97 of 2008 and another cheque for Rs. 1,00,000/- in S.T.98 of 2008 to him. When these cheques were presented for encashment, it was dishonoured for the reason of funds insufficient. He demanded the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing to the drawer of the cheque within the statutory period, on receipt of dishonour memo from the bank. The 1st respondent failed to make payment of the money within time, hence the complaints were filed in the trial court.

(2.) Both transactions arose out of the same debt, two complaints were tried jointly by the trial court. To prove the allegation, appellant examined PW1 and 2 and marked Exts. P1 to P16 as his oral evidence. The incriminating circumstances brought out in evidence were denied by the first respondent while questioning him. He denied the allegation and examined DW1. Trial court after sifting and weighing the evidence on record, acquitted the accused, on the ground that there was material alteration in Ext. P1 and P6 cheques.

(3.) Heard both sides. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the findings of the court below about material alteration in Exts. P1 and P6 is unsustainable in law since the transaction was admitted by the first respondent and there is no reason to disbelieve that evidence.