JAYACHANDRAN Vs. BABURAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the complainant, one Jayachandran, questioning the judgment of acquittal delivered by the Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Trichur in S.T. No. 690 of 1992. The case of the appellant as culled out from the judgment of the Trial Court as well as from the argument of the learned counsel appearing for him would be that a cheque was issued in his favour for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- by the accused / respondent and when the cheque was put in the Bank for collection, it was returned with an endorsement that there was no sufficient fund in the account of the respondent. On receipt of the memo of the Bank, within 15 days, the appellant issued a notice to the respondent. The notice returned unserved. Therefore, the appellant filed a complaint under S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the acquittal of the respondent is erroneous and it requires interference by this Court.

(2.) On the other hand, the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the respondent would be that proviso (c) of S.138 of the Act, which gives a right to the drawer, was not complied with in this case and therefore, the acquittal recorded by the Magistrate is correct and it is in accordance with law.

(3.) On account of the above rival submissions on both sides, the point to be decided is whether the judgment of acquittal recorded by the Court below can be sustained