JUDGMENT :

The complainant in S.T.No.72/2004 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Manjeri has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment dated 14.02.2006, whereby the accused/1st respondent was acquitted in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

2. Heard Sri. K.M. Sathyanatha Menon, learned counsel on behalf of the appellant and Sri.P.Venugopal, learned counsel on behalf of the 1st respondent.

3. According to the appellant, the 1st respondent had borrowed Rs.50,000/- in October 2003 and for securing repayment of the amount, a cheque had been issued, which when sent for collection returned dishonoured for the reason 'fund insufficient'. When no payment was made even after the appellant had issued the statutory notice, the complaint is said to have been filed. The accused contended that during 1994, he was having a bus service and he used to purchase tyre from the shop of one Major Nikkolas and to secure the payment of the price of tyres, he had given blank cheque, which has been misused. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that since the signature in the cheque is admitted, he is entitled to the benefit of presumption under Section 139 of