J.SHAMLAL Vs. G.MANOHARAN, PROPRIETOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant/Complainant has focused the instant Criminal Appeal before this Court as against the Judgment dated 06.09.2013 in C.C. No.3331 of 2010 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, (Fast Track Court No.IV), George Town, Chennai.

(2.) The Learned Judicial Magistrate (Fast Track Court No. IV), George Town, Chennai, while passing the impugned Judgment in C.C.No.3331 of 2010 dated 06.09.2013, at paragraph 14, had, inter alia, observed that '... the afore-stated financiers were not examined in the case to prove the debt amount to be paid by the Respondent to the financiers', further the said financiers details were not informed on behalf of the Complainant and that for collecting the debt, the financiers had not given any authorisation and opined that under the present circumstances, there arises suspicion on the case of the Complainant and by granting the benefit of doubt in favour of the Respondent/Accused found him not guilty, since an offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and resultantly, acquitted him under Sec. 255(1) Cr.P.C.

(3.) Questioning the Validity, Legality and correctness of the Judgment of Acquittal dated 06.09.2013 passed by the trial Court, the Appellant/Complainant (through his Power Agent) had filed the present Appeal, mainly by taking a plea that the Respondent/Accused was acquitted by the trial Court based only on 'presumptions, surmises and conjectures'. Moreover, it is represented on behalf of the Appellant that the trial Court had not taken into consideration the evidence of P.W.1 at the time of passing the impugned Judgment.