High Court dismissed criminal appeal in cheque bounce case under Section 138 NI Act, upholding trial court acquittal due to insufficient evidence proving the loan amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU
THURSDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2007 / 21ST ASHADHA 1929
CRL.A.No. 516 of 1999()
----------------------CC.789/1997 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, ERNAKULAM
APPELLANT: COMPLAINANT --------------
L.CDR.JACOB VARGHESE, (INDIAN NAVY), ALD, INS-GARUDA, NAVAL BASE, COCHIN 4.
BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR
RESPONDENT: ACCUSED
------------------
1. DAISY JOHN, KURAVANPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUKKAVALA P.O., KAYAMKULAM.
2. STATE OF KERALA, BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADV. SRI.VPK.PANICKER PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/07/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
K.R.UDAYABHANU, J
Crl.A.No.516 of 1999
--------------------------------------------Dated this the 12th day of July, 2007
JUDGMENT
The appellant is the complainant in C.C.No.789/97 with respect to the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in which the accused was acquitted.
Page numbers
CRA516/99
Ext.C1 the extract of the account of the accused was also proved through DW1.
CRA516/99
Page numbers
accused. In the circumstances, the version of the defence appeared were probable. PW1 has also stated in the cross examination that the amount received through D/D was credited to the combined account of the accused and her husband. It is in the above circumstances, the trial court doubted the genuineness of the case set up that altogether a sum of Rs.2.5 lakhs was borrowed and Rs.50,000/- was repaid by way of D/D and Rs.70,000/- as per Ext. P5 letter. But, it is the case that only the impugned cheque has been issued towards the balance amount whereas the balance amount would be Rs.1.3lakhs. Of course, the accused has not stepped into the witness box nor has she sent a reply notice, but only on the basis of the above attitude of the accused she cannot be convicted unless the prosecution proves its case beyond reasonable doubt.
The appeal is dismissed.
K.R.UDAYABHANU, JUDGE
csl
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the revisional court should interfere with the trial court finding that the prosecution did not prove the loan beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether the acquittal of the accused in the cheque bounce case is sustainable on the record.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Accused (Daisy John)
State of Kerala
K.R.Udayabhanu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
