NARHARI VITHALRAO DAHE Vs. SUDAM GANGARAM DAHE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Dissatisfied by the judgment and order of acquittal passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pathri, Dist. Parbhani dtd. 31/3/2005, thereby, acquitting present respondent from offence punishable under Sec. 138 of N.I. Act, original complainant has taken exception to the same by filing instant appeal. FACTUAL MATRIX

(2.) S.C.C. No.1123 of 2001 was filed by present appellant setting up a case that, out of friendly relations and due to financial need he gave loan of Rs.50,000.00 to the accused. Accused undertook to repay the same. However, even on persistent demand, amount was not repaid. Finally, accused issued cheque drawn on his banker, but on its representation it was dishonoured. Therefore, as required under law, legal notice was dispatched, the same was received and even replied by accused, but he failed to repay the cheque amount within stipulated period, and therefore, proceedings under Sec. 138 of NI Act were instituted. SUBMISSIONS On behalf of Appellant : -

(3.) Learned counsel for appellant submitted that, learned trial court surprisingly acquitted the accused taking hyper technical view regarding non mention of exact month in which loan was said to be borrowed and accepted. That, such hyper technical and pedantic view adopted by learned trial Judge is not permissible, more particularly, when all necessary ingredients for attracting offence were made out.