- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by H. Singh in C. Case No. 1584 of 2004 under Section 138 of N. I. Act acquitted the accused Tripti Saha under Section 255(1) Cr. P. C. 2. Shortly put the petitioner's case is that on 27.05.2004 the partnership firm between the complainant and the accused person was dissolved by a deed of partnership by mutual consent and as a result of which a sum of Rs. 65,500/- was to be paid to the complainant by the accused person. Accused person issued four cheques in favour of the complainant in between 28.10.2004 to 30.01.2005. Out of which three cheques of Rs. 16,000/- and one of cheque of Rs. 17,500/- on 30.11.2006 complainant presented cheque No. 642067 dated 30.11.2004 of Rs. 16,000/- to the bank and said cheque was returned with the endorsement insufficient of fund. The complainant gave a lawyer notice to the accused person to pay the amount within fifteen days from the date of the notice but the same letter was returned with the endorsement 'refused'. Thereafter the complaint submitted that accused committed offence under Section 138 of N. I. Act. Hence the present case.
(2.) XXX XXX
(3.) The defence case as it appears from the trend of the crossexamination of the prosecution witnesses and the answer given by the accused person to their respective examination under Section 313 Cr. P. C. is that of absolute innocence. However, the factum of issuance of cheque by the accused for the discharge of the liability is admitted position of this case. The accused simply bank open her case that the complaint was requested by letter dated 06.120.2004 not but present the cheque within three months from the date of issuance of notice. The only point for consideration is whether accused person committed any offence under Section 138 of the act or not.;