Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
BHADRAKUMAR – Appellant
Versus
JYOTHI – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of the complaint under the ni act. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. insufficient proof of debt by the complainant. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. assumption of presumption rebuttal under ni act. (Para 5 , 7) |
| 4. final judgment and dismissal of the appeal. (Para 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT
The complainant in a proceeding initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, ‘NI Act’) is the appellant. He challenges the order of acquittal in S.T.No.1321 of 2010 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kottarakara, dated 17.10.2012.
2. The complainant had alleged that in satisfaction for an amount of Rs.2,25,000/- borrowed by the accused, she issued two cheques dated 20.04.2010 and 26.04.2010 for Rs.95,000/- and Rs.1,30,000/- respectively. The cheques when presented for encashment returned dishonoured with the memo ‘funds insufficient’. A statutory notice was issued to which a reply notice was issued raising false contentions and thereafter, the complaint was filed.
3. In order to prove his case, the complainant examined himself as PW1 and marked Exhibits-P1 to Exhibit-P5. After analysing the prosecution evidence, the Trial Court came to the conclusion that the
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
