S BALAKRISHNA Vs. C S EMMANUEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal, under Section 378 (4) read with 382 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.'), is filed by the appellant/complainant aggrieved by the judgment, dated 09.04.2008, passed in C.C.No.507 of 2005 by the learned VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, whereby and whereunder, 1st respondent/accused was found not guilty of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the N.I. Act') and acquitted him under Section 255 (1) of Cr.P.C.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/complainant, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent/accused, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the 2nd respondent/State and perused the record.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant/complainant would contend that the complainant deposed as P.W.1 and also examined P.W.2, the circumstantial witness to substantiate the accusation against the accused under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. There is Ex.P1-pronote and Ex.P2-cheque. There are also other documents to show that the cheque was dishonoured for want of sufficient money in the account of the accused. There is statutory notice, which was served on the accused. It is also argued that no reliance can be placed on the evidence of D.W.1 (accused) and Ex.D3. In spite of evidence on record, the trial Court was pleased to dismiss the complaint filed by the appellant, which is erroneous and ultimately, prayed to set aside the impugned judgment and convict and sentence the accused for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.