LAWS(GJH)-2011-1-194

RAMESHBHAI SHANABHAI PATEL Vs. SURESHCHADNRA SHANKARLAL PAREKH

Decided On January 17, 2011
RAMESHBHAI SHANABHAI PATEL Appellant
V/S
SURESHCHADNRA SHANKARLAL PAREKH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant-original complainant has preferred the present appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the Judgment and Order of acquittal dated 26th February 1999 passed by the learned 4th Joint Civil Judge (JD) and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Godhra, in Criminal Case No.2026 of 1999 for the offences punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by which the learned Judge was pleased to acquit the respondent No.1-accused of the charges levelled against him.

(2.) THE short facts of the prosecution case is that the present appellant and the respondent No.1-accused knew each other and therefore, at the request of the respondent No.1-accused, the appellant advanced loan of Rs.60,000/- to the respondent No.1-accused. It is also the case of the prosecution that in this connection the respondent No.1-accused issued an Account Payee cheque bearing No.748965 dated 16th September 1996 of Rs.30,000/- drawn on Bank of Baroda, Station Road, Godhra in favour of the present appellant towards part payment. It is the case of the present appellant that however, upon presenting the said cheque for clearing, the same was dishonoured due to insufficient funds in the account of the respondent No.1-accused. It is the case of the prosecution that therefore the appellant issued statutory notice dated 26th September 1996 to the respondent No.1-accused which returned with an endorsement unclaimed. THErefore, the appellant filed a criminal complaint bearing No.2026 of 1996 against the respondent No.1-accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) BEING aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said Judgment and Order of acquittal dated 26th February 1996 passed by the learned 4th Joint Civil Judge (JD) and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Godhra in Criminal Case No.2026 of 1996, the appellant-original complainant, has preferred the above mentioned Criminal Appeal.