IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2008 / 5TH BHADRA 1930 CRL.A.No. 143 of 2008() {C.C.NO.216/2006 OF THE JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, MAVELIKKARA .................... APPELLANT: COMPLAINANT --------------------------------------------- ABRAHAM DANIEL, MANNARETHU HOUSE, PRAYIKKARA MURI, MAVELIKARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR SMT.BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN RESPONDENTS: ACCUSED AND STATE --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ANIL, S/O.K.S.RAGHAVAN, AGED 40 YEARS, L.I.C. AGENT, KARUVAKKAL HOUSE, NEDUMKUNNAM MURI, KARUKACHAL, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.KAMMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- CR.A.No.143 of 2008 ------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of August, 2008. JUDGMENT The complainant in C.C.No.216/06 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Mavelikkara, is the appellant herein. 2. The complaint was lodged against the 1st respondent herein alleging that he borrowed an amount of Rs.1 lakh from the complainant and issued a cheque. On presentation, it was dishonoured on account of insufficiency of funds. The complaint was filed by the complainant alleging an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 {for short 'the Act'}. The sworn statement was recorded and summons was issued to the accused. The accused entered appearance on 17.2.2007. The case was then referred to the Lok adalath held on 20.4.2007. It seems that thereafter, on more than one posting, the complainant was absent. The explanation offered was that he was laid up with Chikungunya. These facts were noted while granting leave to appeal vide order dated CR.A.No.143 of 2008 :: 2 :: 28.1.2008. Taking note of the said order and having gone through the application for exemption filed by the counsel for the appellant on 20.7.2007, I am satisfied that there was no willful default on the part of the complainant. Having heard counsel for the appellant, I am of the view that the appellant must be given another opportunity to prosecute the case. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order of acquittal is set aside. The complaint is restored to file. Learned Magistrate shall further proceed with C.C.No.216/06. The parties are directed to appear on 17.11.2008. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge