DARSHAN SINGH Vs. BALDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BALDEV Singh-respondent No.1 was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short- "the Act") vide judgment dated 24.2.2003 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kharar. Vide order of the even date respondent No.1 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months with a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In appeal respondent No.1 was Criminal Appeal No. 960-SB of 2004 2 acquitted of the charge framed against him vide judgment dated 12.9.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ropar. Hence, the present appeal by the complainant. No one has appeared on behalf of the appellant. On the last date also none had appeared on behalf of the appellant. I have gone through the record available on the file carefully with the able assistance of learned State counsel. The trial Court Ohad convicted respondent No.1 for an offence under Section 138 of the Act, whereas, the Appellate Court acquitted respondent No.1 of the charge framed against him. The case of the complainant was that he had friendly terms with respondent No.1. As a result of which respondent No.1 borrowed a sum of Rs. 2,14,967/- from the complainant. Respondent No.1 issued a cheque of Rs.1,00,000/- in favour of the complainant (Ex.P-8), but when the said cheque was presented for encashment, the same was dishonoured by the bank with the report "funds insufficient". A notice was sent by the complainant through his counsel to respondent No.1 but despite that respondent No.1 failed to make the payment. However, the notice alleged to have been sent by the appellant-complainant to respondent No.1 was received back un-delivered. In these circumstances, learned Additional Sessions Judge rightly held that the complaint was liable to be dismissed as the notice qua demand of payment of cheque amount had never Criminal Appeal No. 960-SB of 2004 3 been served on re spondent No.1. No ground for interference by this Court is made out.

(2.) ACCORDINGLY , this appeal is dismissed.