MANI Vs. A JAGANATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned counsel for the appellant is present today and argued the appeal in the presence of the learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the judgment in C.C.No.72 of 2001 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Udhagamandalam. The complainant, who has lost his case before the trial Court, has preferred this appeal against the acquittal.

(3.) P.W.1 is the complainant, who would depose what he had narrated in the complaint. He has identified Ex.P.1 as the impugned cheque drawn by the accused for Rs.5,00,000/- on 11.2.2000 in order to discharge the subsisting liability of hand loan borrowed on various dates from the complainant. Ex.P.2 is the memo dated 11.2.2000 sent along with Ex.P.1-cheque by Andra bank informing the complainant that the said cheque was returned, since the drawer has no sufficient funds in his account. Ex.P.3 is also another memo of intimation issued by the Indian Bank, wherein the drawer of the cheque (accused) is having his account. Under the original of Ex.P.4 the complainant had sent a notice to the accused informing about the impugned cheque-Ex.P.1 which on presentation was returned by the Bank for the reason "funds insufficient". The said notice was received by the accused on 28.2.2000 under Ex.P.5-acknowledgment.