M. JEBASTIN JEYAKUMAR Vs. V. SATHIS BRUNO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE de-facto complainant in STC No.105 of 2010 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Padmanabhapuram has approached this court by filing the present appeal against the order of the court below acquitting the respondent herein under section 256 Cr.P.C., who figured as accused before the trial court for the non-appearance of the appellant/complainant. The above said case STC No.105 of 2010 was instituted on private complaint alleging commission of an offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) AFTER issuance of summons and after the appearance of the respondent herein/accused, the case stood listed for hearing on 26.08.2011. In fact, the case was taken on file long back and since there was absence of the complainant as well as the accused and also there was absence of representation on behalf of the complainant, the learned Judicial Magistrate chose to pass the impugned order acquitting the respondent herein/accused under section 256 Cr.P.C. The correctness and legality of the said order is sought to be questioned in the present criminal appeal.

(3.) NOTICE before admission was issued to the respondent and the respondent is also represented by a counsel.