A.K. BHASKARAN Vs. K.G. SHEEBA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order of acquittal in S.T. No.1025 of 2004 on the files of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nilambur passed on 30.1.2006 is challenged by the complainant in this appeal.

(2.) He filed a private complaint against the accused alleging offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'the N.I.Act'). His case is that accused, who is the wife of his friend, borrowed from him an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- for her personal needs by the end of November, 2003, agreeing to discharge the debt within a month. Since she failed in her promise, she issued Ext.P1 cheque dated 13.2.2004 in his name drawn on her banker, South Malabar Gramina Bank for the amount borrowed. The cheque on presentment was dishonoured on the ground of want of sufficient funds at the credit of the accused. A notice sent to accused demanding discharge of debt was replied by her denying the whole transaction. Therefore, the complainant lodged prosecution against her invoking Section 138 of the N.I.Act.

(3.) She denied the charge against her when it was read over and explained to her and the appellant thereupon gave evidence in support of his case as PW1 and adduced Exts.P1 to P5 in evidence on his side. The accused in her answers recorded by court under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. submitted that she did neither have any financial transaction nor any acquaintance with the accused. Ext.P1 cheque was not delivered to PW1. She produced Ext.D1 lawyer reply to the demand notice of the appellant. She examined her husband, Anilkumar as DW2 to prove her contention that she did not have any sort of transaction with PW1 and the loan transaction that took place was between PW1 and DW2 and that too, for an amount much lesser than what was claimed in the cheque. The disputed amount was settled at the office of C.I. of Police, Nilambur, and it was later repaid also.