S.P. GARG, J.

1. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant – Dev Prakash Sharma to impugn the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 22.04.2013 of learned Metropolitan Magistrate in Complaint Case No.184/2013 ‘Dev Prakash Sharma vs. M/s.Concept Lighting Solutions Ltd. & Anr.’ under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act whereby the respondents No.2 and 3 (in short Respondents) were acquitted. The appeal is contested by them.

2. The appellant had filed a complaint case against the respondents for commission of offence under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments on 22.02.2008 claiming himself to be proprietor of firm Ideal Associates in whose name cheques in question were issued. The appellant while appearing as CW-1, in the cross-examination, admitted that his son – Bharat Sharma was the ‘proprietor’ of the Ideal Associates. The Trial Court by the impugned judgment acquitted the respondents as the appellant had no ‘locus standi’ to institute the complaint case.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant urged that due to confusion, the appellant, a senior citizen was unable to disclose that he was the ‘proprietor’ of Ideal Associates. Only because of this technical