Prasad Raykar VS B. T. Dinesh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

K. NATARAJAN
Prasad Raykar – Appellant
Versus
B. T. Dinesh – Respondent

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Anand Shetty and Rajashekar, Advocates
For the Respondent:R. Nagendra Naik, Advocate

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant-complainant under Section 378 of Cr.P.C. for setting aside the judgment of acquittal passed by the Second Additional District and Sessions Judge, Davanagere in Crl.A.No.140/2010 dated 07.04.2011 and to confirm the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Davanagere in C.C.No.1303/2009 dated 18.10.2010.

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The case of the appellant before the trial Court is that he has filed a private compliant under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. against the respondent-accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘N.I. Act’) alleging that the accused and complainant are known to each other. The father of the respondent-accused - Bharamappa said to be borrowed Rs.2,60,000/- from the complainant appellant on 07.03.2003 for his business and his family necessities and agreed to pay 2% interest per month by executing the on-demand promissory note in favour of the complainant. In the meantime, the father of the accused - Bharamappa died l

Click Here to Read the rest of this document