1. The Appellant preferred these Criminal appeals against the order of acquittal dated 23.12.2008 made in C.A.Nos.223 and 224 of 2008 on the file of the Additional District Sessions Court/Fast Track Court No.I, erode reversing the order of conviction imposed in the judgment dated 24.6.2008 made in C.C.No.8 and 18 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. III. Erode.

2. The brief case of the appellant in Crl.A.No.131 of 2009:

The case of the appellant before the trial Court is that on 7.6.2007 the accused borrowed a sum of Rs.4,48,500/- from the complainant for his urgent business expenses and to discharge above said liability, the accused issued two post dated cheques, drawn on Dhanalakshmi Bank Limited, Erode, a cheque bearing No.076487 for Rs.4,20,000/- dated 7.7.2007. As per request, the appellant/complainant presented the impugned cheque Exhibit P1 for collection on 7.11.2007 through his bank Punjab National Bank, Erode Branch and the same has been dishonoured as “Funds Insufficient”. The complainant issued a legal notice on 19.11.2007 and the same is filed as Exhibit P3. The local postal authorities intimated the service of notice to the respondent/accused on 20.11.2007 itself up to 28.11.2007, the respondent not claimed the said notice and the postal cover was returned on 29.11.2007 with endorsement ‘not claimed’ intimation. Even though the intimation of notices was received by the respondent purposely evaded to receive the notice. Hence the respondent/accused committed an offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act 1881 as amended by Act of 1988 and miscellaneous provisions Act 2002 Act 55 of 2002.

3. The brief case of the appellant in Crl.A.No.132 of 2009:

The case of the appellant is that on 21.6.2007, the accused borrowed a sum of Rs.4,48,500/- from him for his urgent business expenses and to discharge above said liability, the respondent/accused issued cheque dated 22.10.2007, drawn on Dhanalakshmi Bank Limited Erode, bearing No.096988 for Rs.4.48,500/-. As per request complainant presented the impugned cheque for collection on 22.10.2007 through his bank Punjab National Bank, EC K.K.N. Erode Branch, and the same has been dishonored as “Funds Insufficient”. The complainant received the message by Bank Return Memo on 23.10.2007. The complainant issued a legal notice to the respondent on 19.11.2007. The local postal authorities intimated the respondent on 20.11.2007 itself up to 28.11.2007, the respondent/accused not claimed the said notice and the postal cover was returned on 29.11.2007 with endorsement ‘not claimed’.

4. Before the learned Trial Court, the appellant examined himself as PW1 in both the cases in C.C.nos.8 and 18 of 2008 and Exhibits P1 to P5 was marked. No evidence was adduced on behalf of the respondent/accused.

5. On careful perusal of records, the learned trial Court in its separate judgments, convicted the respondent/accused for the offences u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 months with fine of Rs.4,000/- in default to undergo further period of 2 months simple imprisonment and ordered the sentences to run concurrently.

6. Aggrieved over this, the respondent/accused preferred separate appeals before the learned Additional District Sessions Court / Fast Track Court No.I, erode in C.A.Nos.223 and 224 of 2008 and the learned lower appellate Court was pleased to reverse the findings of the trial Court and acquitted the respondent/accused. Hence the special leave to appeal was sought by the appellant and same was allowed by this Court.

7. I heard Mr. N. Manokaran, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. I.C. Vasudevan, learned counsel for the respondent in both the Criminal Appeals and perused the entire materials available on record.

8. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order of acquittal passed by the first appellate Court is against law, weight of evidence and all probabilities of the case.

9. Th