IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 CRL.A.No. 1975 of 2007() ------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN CRLP.812/2007 Dated 20/09/2007 CC.16/1998 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PAYYANNUR .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER: --------------------- SAJITHA M.V., W/O.LATE N.V.RAJEEVAN, AGED 22 YEARS, MUNDAVALAPPIL HOUSE, CHALAKKODE P.O., KOROME, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN RESPONDENTS/ ACCUSED: -------------------- 1. K.BALAKRISHNAN, BUSINESS, S/O.MUTHUVADATH KORAN, KEEPILATTU HOUSE, KANDANKULANGARA, KANHIMANGALAM P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD FOR R,1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.KAMMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ============== Criminal Appeal No. 1975 of 2007 ==================== Dated this the 1st day of September, 2008. J U D G M E N T The complainant in C.C.No.16/1998 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur is the appellant herein. The calendar case arises out of a complaint filed by the complainant alleging that the accused has committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The allegation was that the accused had issued a cheque for an amount of Rs.One lakh which on presentation was dishonoured with the endorsement “funds insufficient”. Demand did not result in payment of the amount. Therefore a complaint was lodged. 2. A perusal of the order sheet of the calendar case reveals that the complainant and the accused were absent on 7.8.2001 and both had applied. But the court below did not accept the reason given on behalf of the complainant for his absence and hence the accused was acquitted under Section 256 (1) Cr.P.C. Criminal Appeal No. 1975 of 2008 2 3. I have perused the order passed by the court below. Going by the order sheet it cannot be said that there is willful negligence on the part of the complainant. Hence I am of the view that the complainant be given another chance to prosecute the complaint. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The order of acquittal is set aside and the complaint is restored to file. The parties shall appear before the court below on 17.11.2008. V.GIRI, JUDGE bkn/-