MATHAI Vs. SEENIVASAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE complainant, whose complaint under Sec.200 Cr.P.C preferred for an offence punishable under Sec.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act was dismissed, has come forward with this present appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Vellore on 17.8.1994 in C.C.No.138 of 1994.

(2.) ACCORDING to the complainant, the respondent herein owed a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards tyre retreading charges and he issued a cheque for the said sum on 31.1.1994 drawn on Indian Overseas Bank, Allapuram Branch, Allapuram, Vellore. The said cheque, when the same was presented for collection through the banker of the appellant/complainant, was returned on 2.2.1994 with an endorsement "Funds insufficient", Even after the said fact was brought to the notice of the respondent/accused, and a demand for payment was made by serving a notice in writing, he did not make payment within the statutory period of fifteen days and hence the offence punishable under Sec.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act has been committed by the respondent/accused. Such complaint was lodged before the said Magistrate under Sec.200 Cr.P.C.

(3.) THE learned Judicial Magistrate, after going through the evidence, came to the conclusion that the appellant/complainant had not proved the charge beyond reasonable doubt and hence acquitted the respondent/accused by her judgment dated 17.8.1994. Aggrieved by the said judgment of acquittal, the appellant herein, originally preferred a revision before the learned Principal Sessions Judge in Crl.R.C.No.42 of 1994 and the same came to be dismissed holding that the revision was not competent and an appeal alone would lie. Hence the present appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant, challenging the correctness of the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate NO.IV, Vellore.