- (1.) These two petitions have been heard analogously and are being decided together, moreso in view of the fact that the complainant and accused in both the cases are the same being real brothers; the offence under which the private opposite party has been acquitted by learned Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad by the impugned judgments of the same date 29th November, 2016 are also the same i.e., under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Shorn of unnecessary details, from the findings of learned court below in the respective judgments, the following facts emerge.
(2.) In Cri. M. P. No. 222 of 2017, the Cheque bearing No. 318783 dated 10th December, 2009 issued by opposite party No. 2 in the name of complainant has been adduced as Ext. 1; Ext. 1/1 is the signature of Branch Manager in return memo dated 12th December, 2009 with the comment ' payment stopped by drawer' . The legal notice issued by the complainant is dated 27th December, 2009 i.e., within 30 days of receipt of information from the Bank regarding the return of cheque as unpaid, being Ext. 2. Ext. 3 is the reply of notice by the accused/opposite party dated 11th January, 2010 i.e., within 15 days of notice. Complaint was filed on 25th January, 2010.
(3.) In Cri. M. P. No. 226 of 2017, the cheque issued by opposite party No. 2 in the name of complainant bearing No. 318784 is Ext. 2 dated 10th June, 2010. On presentation, the said cheque was returned by the Banker vide Memo dated 12th June, 2010 with the comment ' payment stopped by drawer' . The Advocate notice is Ext. 4, which was issued on 27th June, 2010 making a demand for payment of the said amount within 30 days of the information to the complainant from the Bank regarding return of cheque as unpaid. The opposite party No. 2 replied thereto through letter dated 9.7.2010 as Ext. 1/3. On failure to satisfy the demand, the complaint was filed on 26.7.2010.;