1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA.

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 68 OF 2009

VPK Urban Co-operative Credit

Society Limited,

with its Head Office at

Mardol, Ponda-Goa,

duly represented herein by its

Legal Officer, Ms. Ratna S. Amonkar,

major in age, service,

residing at Caranzalem,

Panaji-Goa. .. Appellant

v e r s u s

1. Shri Santosh Datta Pednekar,

'Mangirish Darshan', Mangeshim,

Mardol, Ponda-Goa.

2. STATE OF GOA,

through its Public Prosecutor,

High Court of Bombay, at Goa. .. Respondents

Shri D. Pangam Advocate for the appellant.

Shri K. Kerkar, Advocate for the respondent no.1.

CORAM: N. A. BRITTO, J.

DATE : 16TH SEPTEMBER, 2009.

2

ORAL JUDGMENT

1.

This is a complainant's appeal and is directed against

Judgment dated 24.11.08 of the Learned JMFC acquitting the accused

under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

2.

The complainant is a registered Co.operative Society governed

by the Maharashtra Co.operative Societies, 1960, as applicable to the

State of Goa and is in the business of accepting deposits and advancing

loans. The accused is one of the members of the complainant.

3.

The complainant filed the complaint on the allegation that the

accused who was one of the members/customers of the complainant was

advanced a loan of Rs.2,50,000/- which was payable with interest in

installments under the terms and conditions stipulated in the agreement.

The complainant stated that the accused committed defaults in payment

of the installments, inspite of repeated requests, and towards part

payment of his liability the accused had in the past issued certain post

3

dated cheques with request to present the same as and when they were

due and one of such cheques was a cheque bearing no.771240 dated

31.3.2007 for Rs.30,000/- drawn on HDFC Bank Limited, Panaji, in

favour of the complainant towards part payment of the said installments

and when the complainant presented the said cheque for realization the

same was returned unpaid on 5.4.07 as the account was closed

whereupon the complainant sent a legal notice dated 18.4.2007 calling

upon the accused to pay the amount due on the said cheque within fifteen

days which the accused received on 19.4.07 but the accused failed and

neglected to pay the amount due and as such the complaint was filed

against the accused.

4.

The complaint was filed by one Ajay A. Kunkolkar, the

Account Officer of Mardol Branch of the complainant and it was filed

pursuant to a resolution of the complainant dated 16.9.06 and a letter of

authority given by the General Manager of the complainant dated

7.10.2006. However, in the course of the trial who was examined was

one Ratna Shripad S. Amonkar pursuant to another resolution of the

complainant dated 10.6.07 and another letter of authority issued in her

4

favour by the General Manager of the complainant.

5.

On the basis of the said resolution as well as authority letter the

said Ratna Shripad S. Amonkar filed her affidavit in evidence on

14.11.2007 and reproduced the facts stated in the complaint and

produced the said resolution as well as the letter of authority dated

10.6.07 and 11.7.07, respectively, alongwith the other documents

including the cheque, the cheque return memo, etc.

6.

The case of the accused was that the cheque was issued as

security. The accused initially stated that he would examine himself but

later did not examine himself. The complainant's witness, the said

Ratna