Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.BADHARUDEEN
Jillmol John – Appellant
Versus
Manjumol K.V. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.BADHARUDEEN, J.
Dated, this the 02nd day of February, 2026 This appeal has been filed challenging the judgment dated 12.10.2021 in S.T. No. 1197 of 2016 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court – II, Pathanamthitta as extracted hereunder:-
“The above case is instituted on a complaint for the offence punishable u/s. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred as the NI Act).
2. The averments in the complaint, in short, are as follows: The accused in discharge of a legally enforceable debt has issued the cheque, bearing No. 677403 dated 15/04/2016 for Rs.67,300/- [Rupees Sixty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Only] drawn on SBT, Medical College Campus Branch, Vandanam to the complainant. The complainant presented the cheque through SBT, Pullad Branch for encashment. But on 19/04/2016 it was returned dishonoured stating “Funds Insufficient”. On 25/04/2016 the complainant caused to issue a lawyer's notice to the accused called upon her to pay the cheque amount. It was duly served to the accused. The accused did not make payment. Hence the above case has been instituted alleging the offence punishable u/s 138 of the NI Act.
3. Cognizance was taken for the offence
A complainant’s repeated absence in a Section 138 case can lead to acquittal for lack of evidence, but a court may allow further opportunity to adduce evidence to ensure fair justice.
Court discretion is necessary in acquitting accused due to complainant's absence; automatic acquittal undermines justice.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of exercising judicial discretion and considering the potential adverse consequences for the complainant in dismissing complaints ....
Judicial discretion must be exercised in dismissing complaints for non-appearance, as personal attendance is not always required.
The importance of the complainant's personal attendance for the progress of the case and the discretion of the Magistrate to adjourn the hearing or dismiss the complaint.
The court emphasizes the importance of providing opportunities for appellants to present their cases in order to ensure justice and uphold the rule of law.
The absence of a complainant in a criminal case can lead to an implied acquittal of the accused under Section 256 of the Cr.PC.
The court emphasizes adherence to procedural requirements for acquittal under the new act, which mandates a 30-day notice period for non-appearance before discharging an accused.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
