JUDGMENT

S.M. Modak, J.—This is the case, wherein both the parties have undertaken the responsibility of discharging the burden on themselves. The complainant examined himself and banker of the accused, whereas, the accused examined himself and one witness, who was present at the material time. In that sense of the matter, I have said that both have undertaken the responsibility. At the end of the trial, the accused succeeded in satisfying the Court to give a verdict in his favour. Resultantly, the accused was acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as “N.I. Act” for short).

02] So, this Court is required to decide, whether the trial Court was right in answering the issue of liability against the complainant. This happened in S.C.C. No.2837/2005. The Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class No.5, Nagpur gave verdict as said above on 19/08/2006. It is challenged at the instance of the complainant before this Court.

03] I get an opportunity to hear learned Advocate Shri S.H. Quazi for the appellant and learned Advocate Shri R.M. Patwardhan for the respondent-accused. Through their assistance, I have perused the