RONALD RAO Vs. DHANRAJ SHRAVABJI KORDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is a judgment of acquittal by the trial Court Magistrate in Summary Criminal Complaint Case No.20102/2015 on 15-12-2017. The present appellant is a complainant and the present respondent is the accused therein. There was prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'N.I. Act.'). The learned Magistrate has framed in all 5 points and the findings on all the points are in favour of the complainant. However, the trial Court Magistrate was pleased to acquit the accused and it is for the reason that the complainant could not prove 'funds insufficient' as a reason for dishonour. The correctness of the said finding and the judgment is challenged before this Court.

(2.) As the limited issue is involved, I have taken up this appeal for final hearing with the consent of both the learned Advocates.

(3.) The issue involved in this appeal is, whether on the basis of available evidence, the complainant has proved "reason for dishonour as funds insufficient". According to the complainant, he has filed 3 cheque return memos. They are at Exhibits-16, 18 and 20. They are issued by the Federal Bank Limited, who is the collective banker. The complainant is having account in the said bank. I have perused those cheque return memos. It is a fact that those memos do not bear the seal of the bank and any signature. According to the complainant, in spite of these lacunae, those 3 memos have been proved. For that purpose, he relied upon the conduct of the accused during the trial. According to the complainant, when these memos were tendered, the accused has not objected for giving exhibits. This is one of the reasons quoted by the complainant. Another reason is the accused while cross examining the complainant has not challenged these memos. He has not pointed out any lacunae in the memos and even not given suggestion about the proof of reason for dishonour.