SANJAY KR. SINGH Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. M. U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for respondent No.2 although the name of the counsel has been shown in the cause list. I have also heard Mr. P. S. Lahkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent No.1, who is a formal party in the present case.

(2.) The present appeal has been preferred against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta in N.I. Case No.14/15, under Section 138 of N.I. Act.

(3.) The brief fact of the case is that the appellant as complainant had filed the aforesaid case before the court below with the assertion that he had some business transaction with the accused/respondent and out of such business transaction, the accused/respondent issued cheque bearing No.061130 dated 18.10.2014 for Rs.11 lakh to the appellant to discharge his liability. Accordingly, the complainant/appellant deposited the cheque to the concerned SBI, Mathgharia Branch for encashment on two occasions on 18.10.2014 and 20.04.2014 and on both occasions, the cheque was returned for insufficient fund. After intimating the matter to the accused/respondent by issuing legal notice, apart from verbal intimation, the complainant finally filed the aforesaid case for non-response by the respondent towards such payment. The accused turned on before the court, contested the case, and denied the charge that was framed under Section 138 of N.I. Act and claimed to be tried.