ANIL RAVINDRAN Vs. N. VENUGOPAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner is the accused in C.C. No. 193/2002 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court -I, Cherthala as well as appellant in Crl.Appeal No. 414/2006 on the files of Addl.Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Court -II, Alappuzha.

(2.) IT is the case of the complainant that the accused and complainant are friends and on 15.1.2002, the accused borrowed Rs. 40,000/ - from the complainant and issued a cheque in discharge of that liability. When the cheque was presented for encashment, the same is dishonoured and returned for want of sufficient funds in the account.

(3.) TO discharge the initial burden of proving the execution of the cheque, the complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts. P1 to P6 were marked. After analyzing the evidence of PW1, the court below observed that, nothing has been brought out to discredit the evidence of PW1 and the complainant has successfully discharged the initial burden of proof and thereby the presumption under Section 118(a) and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act would stand in favour of the complainant.