The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of timely objections and the admissibility of documents in evidence.

JUDGMENT :

1. Instant appeal under section 378 (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the appellant against Respondent no. 1 to 5 being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 29.08.2005 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 13th Court Calcutta in Case No. C-5021 of 2000, thereby acquitting the accused/ opposite party no. 2 to 5 of the charges under sections 138/141 of the Negotiable Instrument Act.

2. The appellant preferred an application praying for Special Leave to Appeal against the impugned judgment and order and the same was registered as C.R.M No. 180 of 2006. The same was allowed on 28.02.2006 and Special Leave was granted to the appellant company to file the appeal.

3. In gist, the fact of appellant’s case is that the appellant is a company incorporated under the companies Act, 1956 having its place of business at 13A, Government Place East, Kolkata-700 069. Respondent No 2 is a company incorporated under the companies Act, 1956 having its place of business at 10, Canning Street, Kolkata and Respondents no. 3 to 5 are the Directors of Respondent no. 2 Company.

4. A complaint was lodged on behalf of the appellant company before the court of learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta disclosing an offence committed by Respondents no. 2 to 5, punishable under section 138/141 of the Negotiable Instrument Act (herein after referred as the N.I. Act).

5. In discharge of their existing liability in respect of the loan taken from the Appellant company, Respondents no. 2 to 5 issued an account payee cheque bearing no. 212779 dated 29.5.2000 for Rs. 5,12,188/- drawn on Bank of India, Calcutta Overseas Branch, in favour of the appellant company.

6. The said cheque was placed for encashment but was returned dishonoured on 24.8.2000 with the remark “Exceeding Arrangement”. The appellant company thereafter sent a Notice dated 2.9.2000, addressed to the Respondents no. 2 to 5, informing them that the cheque was dishonoured and asked them to make payment of the cheque amount within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said notice.

7. The Respondents no. 2 and 4 received the said notice on 6.9.2000 while Respondent no. 3 and 5 received the notice on 15.9.2000 but failed to pay the amount claimed. Under such circumstances Respondents no. 2 to 5 committed an offence punishable under section 138/141 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. On 3.10.2000 learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kolkata on the basis of complaint was pleased to take cognizance of the offence and after examining the authorized representative of the appellant company was pleased to find that a prima facie case was made out against Respondents no. 2 to 5 under sections 138/141 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and issued process against them.

8. Respondents no. 2 to 5 thereafter appeared before the court and the case was transferred to the court of Learned 13th Metropolitan Magistrate, Kolkata for disposal. On 25.9.2001, Respondents no. 2 to 5 were examined under section 251 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the substance of the accusation were read over and explained to them to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

9. In order to prove their case appellant/ complainant examined three witnesses namely Abhijit Sarkar, employee of the States Bank of India, the banker of Respondents no. 2 to 5, as PW-1. Chandrasekhar Behara, Manager, Global Trust Bank, Chowringhee Branch, Calcutta, banker of the appellant company as PW-2 and Amarendra Nath Chatterjee, constituted attorney of the appellant company as PW-3.

10. Respondents no. 2 to 5 were examined under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and were confronted with incriminating circumstances for their explanation.

11. The Respondents no. 2 to 5 examined one defence witness Dipti Prakash Show as DW-1.

12. After considering the evidence on record learned Metropolitan Magistrate 13th Court, Calcutta was pleased to pass an order on 29.8.2005 wherein he hel