ANIL DAGWALE Vs. K RAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-complainant being aggrieved by the judgment of the IV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Hyderabad acquitting the 1st respondent- accused in C.C.No.617 of 1995 for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('the Act' for brevity) has preferred this appeal challenging its validity and legality.

(2.) According to the appellant- complainant, the 1st respondent took hand loans from him from January, 1995 to May 1995 to a tune of Rs.75,000/- for the purpose of development of his business. On 1-6-1995 the 1st respondent in discharge of the above said oral debt issued three cheques dated 1-6-1995, 5-6-1995 and 8-6-1995 (Exs.P.1 to P.3) for Rs.25,000/- each. The appellant presented those cheques to the Bank on 13-7-1995, but they were dishonoured by the bank on 14-7-1995 and a Cheque Return Memo was sent to him stating that the 1st respondent-accused closed his account. On 26-7-1995 the appellant issued a legal notice to the 1st respondent-accused calling upon him to pay the amount covered by the dishonoured cheques. The respondent-accused having received the notice on 31-7-1995 sent a reply denying the issuance of the cheques and failed to repay the amount. Hence the appellant approached the IV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Hyderabad by filing a complaint.

(3.) The Trial Court took cognizance of the complaint under Section 138 of the Act, secured the presence of the accused, framed a charge under Section 138 and conducted the trial.