JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) The appellant/accused is aggrieved by the judgment dated
17.03.2010 passed in Criminal Appeal No.1707/2007 of the High
Court of Kerala at Ernakulam. The respondent herein preferred a
complaint against the appellant under Section 142 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act (hereinafter called 'the Act') for an offence
punishable under Section 138 of the Act. According to the
complainant, the appellant/accused entrusted the work of
construction of an Old Age Home and a Chapel at Punnaveli,
Pathanamthitta District based on an agreement between the
appellant and the respondent. According to the respondent, the
appellant issued a post dated cheque for Rs.25 lakhs in favour of the
respondent towards the outstanding amount due to him for the work
done by him. The cheque was dated 21.03.2005. It was claimed that
when the cheque was presented by the respondent with his bankers,
the same was dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds in the
account of the appellant. It was further claimed that though the
respondent intimated about the dishonour of the cheque by a
lawyer's notice dated 30.03.2005 served on the appellant on
31.03.2005, she came forward with a reply taking the stand that no
amount was due and that the respondent stealthily removed two
cheques from the custody of the appellant of which the present one
was forged and presented for clearance. Before the trial Court the
appellant pleaded not guilty. On behalf of the respondent Exhibits P-
1 to P-20 were marked and the respondent examined himself as
P.W.1. On behalf of the appellant Exhibits D-1 to D-4 series were
marked, in the course of cross-examination of P.W.1. No oral
evidence was adduced on behalf of the appellant. When the
incriminating circumstances were put against the appellant under
Section 313 of Cr.P.C. she denied the same and filed a written
statement.
(2.) The trial Court on a detailed analysis of the evidence, placed before it,
ultimately held that the appellant was able to rebut the presumption
and that there was no circumstance warranting the execution of
Exhibit P-1 cheque in favour of the respondent. So holding, the trial
Court found the appellant not guilty of the offence under Section 138
of the Act and acquitted her under Section 255(1) of Cr.P.C.
(3.) Aggrieved by the acquittal of the appellant, the respondent preferred
an appeal before the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam wherein the
impugned judgment came to be rendered.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.