Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J. - (1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 20.6.2008 passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.2, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Cr. Case No. 2889/04, whereby the accused respondent has been acquitted from the offence under Section 138 of N.I Act.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are as under:- "Complainant appellant filed a complaint against the respondent for the offence under Section 138 of NI Act. The trial court took cognizance against the accused respondent for the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act and summoned the accused respondent. The substance of the accusation was stated to him, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial. Thereafter the complainant examined himself as PW-1 and exhibited some documents. Thereafter the statement of accused respondent were recorded under Section 313 CrPC and she got exhibited some documents. After hearing both the sides, the learned trial court vide his judgment dated 20.6.2008 acquitted the accused respondent. Hence, against the judgment dated 20.6.2008, this appeal was preferred by the complainant-appellant."
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the impugned judgment dated 20.6.2008 passed by the court below is patently illegal, improper, unjust and not sustainable being contrary to the facts of the case and the material available on record. He has further contended that despite substantial and compelling reasons for conviction of accused respondent, the learned trial court acquitted the accused on wrong assumption of law, therefore, the acquittal of accused deserves to be reversed. He has further contended that the trial court acquitted the accused giving undue importance to minor discrepancies and making a suspicion on evidence based on conjectures, therefore, the impugned judgment deserves to be quashed and set-aside.;