R. Basant, J.—Does a cheque issued after the date of closure of the account fall within the , sweep of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act? This is the question of law thrown up for consideration in this appeal against an appellate Judgment of acquittal.

2. Fundamental facts are not in dispute. The cheque in question is Ext. P1. It is dated 23.12.1991. It was dishonoured on 21.1.1992. The account on which the cheque was drawn was closed by the accused long earlier on 30.1.1990. The cheque was dishonoured on the ground that the account was closed. Signature in the cheque is admitted. The accused con- tended that the cheque was not issued for the due discharge of any legally enforceable debt/liability to the complainant. It was issued to another person one Vijayan by name. The obvious suggestion was that the undated cheque handed over to the said Vijayan as security was being misused by the complainant.

3. P.Ws. 1 to 3 were examined and Exts. P1 to P6 were marked. On the side of the accused D.Ws. 1 to 3 were examined and Exts.D1 to D4 were marked.

4. The trial Court held that all ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments