KRUSHNAJI Vs. AMOL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard rival arguments on earlier dates on this appeal preferred by original complainant challenging the judgment and order of acquittal. Perused the evidence led before the Trial Court and also perused the citations referred on behalf of the appellant. The present respondent-accused was acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, vide order dated 14/1/2008 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Maregon in Summary Criminal Case No. 521/2007.

(2.) Prior to discussing the rival submissions and in order to ascertain whether the impugned judgment and order is required to be altered and set aside, the case of the complainant is narrated as under:-

(3.) Similar loan was asked by the accused and his father for Rs. 30,000/- with same assurance of refund the same along with earlier taken loan. On this, the complainant gave loan of Rs. 27,000/- to the accused. In discharge of this liability, the accused issued another cheque dated 19/2/2007 for Rs. 27,000/ - drawn on the same bank as in the first case. The respective cheques are bearing nos. 177216 and 177217. The said cheques were presented to the banker of the complainant, however, were returned by the bank with the endorsement "funds insufficient and present again". On this, mistakenly, believing that the cheques were under the signatures of the father of the accused, a demand notice was issued in the name of the father of the accused on 5/6/2007. It was duly received but no compliance from the father of the accused.