not by itself non-suit or debar the accused from appropriately devising his defence strategy. So the first opportunity that was available to the accused for setting up his defence case was during the cross examination of P.W-1 (complainant). During the cross examination of P.W-1, the defence has put up a concrete suggestion that a blank signed cheque was given by the accused to one Sri.Varghese with whom alone the accused has transactions, etc. Thereafter, the accused tendered evidence before the court as defence witness (DW-1). Both sides have extensively taken this Court to the chief examination and cross examination of DW-1 (accused). In the evidence tendered by DW-1(accused) he has clearly and specifically stated that he had given blank signed cheque to one Sri.Varghese, with whom he had monetary liability and that he had repeatedly gone to the residence of the said Sri.Varghese, to get back the original of the cheque, after clearing the liability, but complainant's friend, the said Sri.Varghese was sending him away giving lame excuses and further that Sri.Varghese, had informed the accused that the cheque and the necessary papers are with the present complainant, Sri.George Varghese. Further, he has clearly deposed as defence witness that it is the said blank signed cheque given to Sri.Varghese, which has been given as Ext.P-1 in the present complaint. When DW-1 was subjected to intense cross examination, he has again reiterated his version and has stated that whatever he has stated is true and correct and that the cheque
