D. BHASKARAN S/O LATE R.V. DURAISAMY Vs. SRI. N.V. MURTHY S/O LATE. V.K. NARASIMHAN HINDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is by the complainant against the judgment of acquittal dated 20.07.2006 in C.C. No. 13673/2003 on the file of XIX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. Bangalore City.

(2.) THE case of the complainant was that, the accused had borrowed a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/ - for purchase of Tata Sumo Vehicle. In this regard, he had issued a cheque bearing No. 5026 dated 12.06/2003 for a sum of Rs. 300,000/ - drawn on Ashoknagar Co -operative Bank Limited, BSK I Stage, Bangalore, When the said cheque was presented fey encashment to the bank, the bank returned the cheque with an endorsement "Insufficient. Funds". In this regard, the complainant had issued a legal notice calling upon the accused to repay the amount mentioned in the cheque. However, the accused in his reply, denied of the liability to the tune of Rs. 3,00,000/ - but admitted that he had borrowed only Rs. 40,000/ - and the said sum of Rs. 40,000/ - along with interest to the funs of Rs. 20,000/ -, in all Rs. 60.000/ - has been paid and further stated that, at the time of borrowing, the complainant had taken blank signed cheque and also blank Promissory Note and the same has been misused. Since the accused did not make any payment in pursuance of the legal notice issued by the complainant, the complainant filed a private complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C.

(3.) THE trial Court, on appreciation of the evidence, held that the complainant has not proved the transaction and has also not proved that the debt is legally recoverable and accordingly, it acquitted the accused. As against the said judgment of acquittal, the complainant is in appeal.