VIJAY BISHNOI,J. - (1.) This criminal appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellant being aggrieved with the judgment dated 6.8.2014 passed by the Distt. and Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer (for short 'the appellate court') in Criminal Appeal No.18/2013, whereby the appellate court has accepted the appeal filed by the respondent No.2 and set aside the judgment dated 8.5.2013 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Jaisalmer (for short 'the trial court') in Criminal Regular Case No.16/2011.
(2.) The trial court vide judgment dated 8.5.2013 has convicted the respondent No.2 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced him for one year's simple imprisonment and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.60,000/- to the appellant.
(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the appellant has filed a complaint against the respondent No.2 under Section 138 of the N.I. Act before the trial court on 1.9.2010 while alleging that he has advanced a loan of Rs.40,000/- to the respondent No.2 for his personal needs and the respondent No.2 has given him a cheque No.0201822 dated 5.6.2010 for repayment of the said loan. It is alleged that the above mentioned cheque was presented by the appellant in the concerned bank on 8.6.2010, however, the same was returned by the bank with a remark 'insufficient fund'. It is further alleged that the appellant has informed the respondent No.2 about dishonour of the cheque given by him, then, the respondent No.2 asked him that he may present the cheque for realization on 23.7.2010 and on this, the appellant has again presented the said cheque in the concerned bank on 23.7.2010 but the same was again dishonoured and returned with the remark 'insufficient fund'. It is alleged that the appellant has thereafter sent a registered notice to the respondent No.2 through his Advocate on 5.8.2010, however, despite receipt of the said notice, the respondent No.2 has not paid the cheque amount to him.;