Dr. B. Siva Sankara Rao, J.—The complainant in C.C.No.1306 of 2004 against the accused persons 1 to 3 viz., A1 is private company to which A2 and A3 among others said to be directors, on a private complaint for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act (for short the Act), after full-fledged trial being ended in acquittal of the accused by judgment dt.21.04.2008 preferred the appeal, with leave since granted under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C.

2. The contentions in the grounds of appeal are that the trial Court judgment is erroneous and contrary to law and against the evidence on record and based on conjectures and surmises and in a perversive manner arriving at the finding in carving out a new case in favour of the accused with no evidence or material, the learned Magistrate misread the evidence and misinformed himself in overlooking the important and material evidence on record that resulted in miscarriage of justice and thereby to set aside the said finding. It is further contended in the grounds of appeal as well as oral submissions that it is brought in the cross-examination of accused persons 2 and 3 by PW1 for substantiating their role in A1 company where