Bangalore District Court
Sri. N.Naveen vs Smt. Umadevi on 30 July, 2020
BEFORE THE LXVI ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY.
(CCH-67)
DATED: This the 30 th day of July, 2020
PRESENT
Smt. K.KATHYAYANI, B.Com, L.L.M .
LXVI Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru
Criminal Appeal No.1094 of 2019
Appellant: Sri. N.Naveen,
S/o Nagaraj,
Aged about 40 years,
R/at Vaibhav House,
Saraswathi Honnay,
No.225-162, 7th Cross,
Narasipura, Vidyaranyapura,
Bengaluru 560 097.
(By Sri.Fiyaz Ahamed,Adv.)
/Vs/
Respondent : Smt. Umadevi,
W/o late Yogesh,
Aged about 35 years,
R/at No.780, 2nd Main,
5th Cross, Muneshwara Layout,
Laggere, Bengaluru.
(By Sri.JKJ,Adv.)
JUDGMENT
The appellant/accused has preferred this appeal against the respondent/complainant under Section 374(3) of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction 2 Crl.A.No.1094/2018 passed in CC.No.28596/2015 dated 02.11.2016 by the learned XII ACMM, Bengaluru.
2. For the sake of convenience, the ranks of the parties are retained as they are before the learned Magistrate Court.
3. The brief facts of the case are that;
a) The complainant has come up with the present complaint on the allegations that he and the accused were well acquainted with each other.
b) Due to the said acquaintance, in the month of August-2014, the accused borrowed a hand loan of Rs.60,000/- from the complainant assuring to repay the same within a year along with interest.
c) After the lapse of agreed period, on demand made by the complainant for repayment of the loan, the accused had issued the cheque bearing No.083178 dated 14.08.2015 for Rs.60,000/- drawn on Axis Bank, Malleshwaram, Bengaluru.
d) When the said cheque was presented for encashment, it was returned with the endorsement dated 11.05.2015 with the shara that "funds insufficient". 3
Crl.A.No.1094/2018
e) In spite of issuance of legal notice, the accused did not pay the cheque amount. Accordingly, the complaint was filed in PCR.No.14005/2015.
4. The trial Court record reveals that on receipt of the complaint, the learned Magistrate was pleased to record the sworn statement of the complainant and on satisfaction, has taken cognizance and registered the case in CC.No.28596/2015 as well as issued summons to the accused.
a) In response to the service of summons, the accused appeared through his counsel and enlarged on bail by furnishing the cash surety.
b) In support of her case, the complainant herself has stepped into the witness box as PW-1. Got exhibited 5 documents.
c) Since, the accused was absent, the cross examination of the complainant was taken as nil.
d) Later, since, the accused remained continuously absent, his bail bond was forfeited to the State and NBW was issued against him which was returned unexecuted. 4
Crl.A.No.1094/2018
e) Therefore, holding that the present complaint is summary trial in nature and quasi criminal in nature and the accused did not challenge the evidence of the complainant, dispensed the statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.
f) Holding that the accused has failed to move application under Section 145(2) of NI Act to adduce the defence evidence, the defence evidence of the accused was also taken as nil and in the absence of the accused, the matter was posted for arguments.
g) After hearing the counsel for the complainant and going through the evidence let in by her, the trial Court has passed the impugned judgment convicting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act and sentenced accordingly in his absence.
5. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction, the accused has approached this Court with the following grounds.
a) The findings given by the trial Court is illegal and unlawful which is opposed by law and facts. 5
Crl.A.No.1094/2018
b) The evidence which was recorded pending warrant against him opposing all legal probabilities which is self contradictory, self conflicting, unwarranted and uncalled for.
c) He is financially well off and at no point of time, he has borrowed the hand loan of Rs.60,000/- and there was no need for him to borrow any loan from the complainant. Hence, there is no legal and lawful enforceable liability to be discharged by him.
d) At no point of time, he has issued the alleged cheque in favour of the complainant against the alleged loan.
e) The complainant is his family friend and used to visit his house. By gaining entry into the house, the cheque has been taken to her possession which is not within his knowledge.
f) Immediately, after receipt of summons, when he questioned about the illegal possession of the cheque, the complainant pleaded that she will withdraw the complaint and return the cheque. Hence, he remained absent and 6 Crl.A.No.1094/2018 behind his back, she has obtained the judgment and order in his absence.
g) In case of conviction, it is necessary to keep the accused present and the trial Court ought to have been considered the same.
h) The judgment passed by the trial Court is self contradictory, self conflicting without appreciating the evidence and without summoning the document and account extract to show that the complainant was holding amount on that particular day.
i) The complainant absolutely has no material on record to prove her case. The trial Court committed grave error in convicting him without any iota of evidence on the record of the case.
j) Hence, prayed this Court to set aside the judgment of conviction and sentence passed and acquit him in the interest of justice and equity.
6. In response to the due service of notice by this court, the complainant/respondent put her appearance through her counsel.
7. Secured the trial Court record.
7
Crl.A.No.1094/2018
8. Despite of sufficient time, the accused and his counsel remained absent and did not address their arguments on merits. Hence, it was taken as not submitted.
9. Heard the learned counsel for the complainant on merits and perused the record.
10. On the basis of the grounds made out, following points are arisen for my determination.
1. Whether the accused/appellant proves the grounds urged by him in support of this appeal?
2. Whether the impugned judgment requires interference by this court?
3. What Order?
11. My findings to the above points are:
1. Point No.1 : Partly Affirmative.
2. Point No.2 : Affirmative.
3. Point No.3 : As per the final order for the following reasons.
REASONS
12. POINT Nos.1 AND 2:- As the finding on point No.2 is consequential to the findings on point No.1, they are taken together.
8
Crl.A.No.1094/2018
13. The accused has approached this Court with the present appeal mainly on the grounds that;
a) The evidence which was recorded pending warrant against him opposing all legal probabilities which is self contradictory, self conflicting, unwarranted and uncalled for; and
b) In case of conviction, it is necessary to keep the accused present and the trial Court ought to have been considered the same.
14. The trial Court record reveals that;
a) The complaint was presented on 19.11.2015 and on receipt of the same, the learned Magistrate ordered to register the case and posted the case for sworn statement by 04.12.2015.
b) On 04.12.2015, the complainant was absent and the case was adjourned to 29.01.2016 for sworn statement.
c) Later, the case was advanced on the same date on the instance of the complainant, i.e., 04.12.2015 and the sworn statement was recorded, on satisfaction, the learned Magistrate took the cognizance against the accused, 9 Crl.A.No.1094/2018 ordered to register the case in Criminal Case Register and issued summons to the accused returnable by 29.01.2016.
d) On 29.01.2016, it is noted in the order sheet that "PF paid, reissue summons by hand, returnable by 03.03.2016".
e) On 03.03.2016, it is mentioned in the order sheet that "summons to the accused duly served, accused is absent, issue NBW to the accused if PF paid returnable by 16.04.2016".
f) Since, 16.04.2016 till 24.05.2017, for 8 hearing dates, the case was adjourned reissuing NBW to the accused and lastly it was returnable by 13.07.2017.
g) In the meanwhile on 11.07.2017, the case was advanced on the instance of the accused and his bail application was came to be allowed and for plea, the case was adjourned to 13.07.2017 on which date, the plea was recorded at 3:00 p.m., and the case was posted to 05.08.2017 to record the complainant's evidence.
h) Since then i.e., from 05.08.2017 till the conclusion of the trial i.e., passing of the judgment of conviction on 19.05.2008, the accused remained absent and till 10 Crl.A.No.1094/2018 26.03.2018, the NBW was reissued to the accused and thereafter no process was ordered against the accused, but the trial was continued and concluded.
i) In between, on 05.10.2017, the chief evidence of the complainant was recorded and his cross-examination was taken as nil as well as the complainant submitted that she has no further evidence to lead. On 26.03.2018, the order was passed dispensing the statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and the defence evidence of the accused was taken as nil and the matter was posted to 04.04.2018 for arguments on merits as noted above.
j) On 04.04.2018, arguments was heard and the case was posted to 07.04.2018, 09.04.2018, 20.04.2018, 30.04.2018, 18.05.2018 for judgment and lastly on 19.05.2018, the impugned judgment was passed by convicting the accused.
15. So, it is evident on record that the entire trial of the case was conducted and concluded in the absence of the accused.
16. As noted above, the chief evidence of the complainant was recorded in the absence of the accused 11 Crl.A.No.1094/2018 (the order sheet demonstrates no mention of the presence of the counsel for the accused also) on 05.10.2017 when NBW issued against the accused was pending and the cross examination of the complainant was also taken as nil on the very day i.e., on 05.10.2017 itself.
17. As observed above, the reasons stated for dispensation of statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. is that the present complaint is summary trial and quasi criminal in nature and the accused did not challenge the evidence of the complainant.
18. Of course, as noted above, it is apparent on the face of record that the accused appeared before the Court only on 11.07.2017 by getting advanced the case and on that date, he was enlarged on bail and on the next date i.e., on 13.07.2017, he was before the trial Court on which date, his plea was recorded. Thereafter, he continuously keep on absent before the trial Court.
19. At this stage, it is pertinent to note that it is also one of the grounds of the accused in support of this appeal that immediately, after receipt of summons, when he questioned about the illegal possession of the cheque, the 12 Crl.A.No.1094/2018 complainant pleaded that she will withdraw the complaint and return the cheque. Hence, he remained absent and behind his back, she has obtained the judgment and order in his absence.
20. Even for the sake of arguments, the above contention of the accused is not accepted, then also, it is important to note that what the law mandates on the Court in the interest of natural justice, whether the Court can proceed with the trial against an accused in his absence even in a summary, quasi criminal trial.
21. At this stage, it is pertinent to note that in the impugned judgment in the last 6 lines of page No.4, it is observed that;
"Since the present complaint is summary trial in nature, I am relying on the citation reported in AIR 2014 SC 2528 Indian Bank Association & others V/s. Union of India and others - Negotiable Instruments Act (26 of 1881), Section 138, 143, 145. dishonour of cheque -
summary trial - directions given to trial Court to follow procedures for speedy and expeditious disposal of cases falling under Section 138 of N.I.Act. Thereby appearance of the accused is dispensed with and the case was posted for arguments".
22. Hence, it is necessary to go through the relevant portion of the dictum rendered in the above decision i.e., 13 Crl.A.No.1094/2018 the decision reported in AIR 2014 SC 2528 (Indian Bank Association and Ors Vs Union of India & Ors in Writ Petition (Civil) No.18 of 2013 decided on 21.04.2014) which is extracted here below.
"Negotiable Instruments Act (26 of 1881), Ss. 138, 143, 145 - Dishonour of cheque - Summary trial
- Directions given to trial Court to follow procedures for speedy and expeditious disposal of cases falling under S.138.
Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) Ss. 262, 263, 265.
Section 143 empowers the Court to try cases for dishonour of cheques summarily in accordance with the provisions of Sections 262 to 265 of the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, S. 143 of the Act as amended by the Amendment Act, 2002 stipulating that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, all offences contained in Chapter XVII of the Negotiable Instruments Act dealing with dishonour of cheques for insufficiency of funds, etc., shall be tried by a Judicial Magistrate and the provisions of Sections 262 to 265, Cr.P.C. prescribing procedure for summary trials, shall apply to such trials and it shall be lawful for a Magistrate to pass sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year and an amount of find exceeding Rs.5000/- and it is further provided that in the course of a summary trial, if it appears to the Magistrate that the nature of the case requires passing of the sentence of imprisonment exceeding one year, the Magistrate, after hearing the parties record an order to that effect and thereafter recall any witness and proceed to hear or rehear the case in the manner provided in Criminal Procedure Code. Many of the directions given by the various High Courts, are worthy of emulation by the Criminal Courts all over the country dealing with cases under Section 138 of Negotiable 14 Crl.A.No.1094/2018 Instruments Act, for which the following directions are being given:-
(1) Metropolitan Magistrate/Judicial magistrate (MM/JM), on the day when the complaint under Section 138 of the Act is presented, shall scrutinize the complaint and, if the complaint is accompanied by the affidavit, and the affidavit and the documents, if any, are found to be in order, take cognizance and direct issuance of summons.
(2) MM/JM should adopt a pragmatic and realistic approach while issuing summons. Summons must be properly addressed and sent by post as well as by e-mail address got from the complainant. Court, in appropriate cases, may take the assistance of the police or the nearby Court to serve notice to the accused. For notice of appearance, a short date be fixed. If the summons is received back unserved, immediate follow up action be taken.
(3) Court may indicate in the summon that if the accused makes an application for compounding of offences at the first hearing of the case and, if such an application is made, Court may pass appropriate orders at the earliest.
(4) Court should direct the accused, when he appears to furnish a bail bond, to ensure his appearance during trial and ask him to take notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. to enable him to enter his plea of defence and fix the case for defence evidence, unless an application is made by the accused under Section 145(2) for re-calling a witness for cross-examination.
(5) The Court concerned must ensure that examination in chief, cross examination and re examination of the complainant must be conducted within three months of assigning the case. The Court has option of accepting affidavit of the witnesses instead of examining them in Court. Witnesses to the complainant and accused must be available for cross examination as and when there is direction to this effect by the Court." 15
Crl.A.No.1094/2018
23. Now, it is necessary to go through the provision of Section 262 of Cr.P.C. which deals with the procedure for summary trials and it is extracted here below.
"262. Procedure for summary trials.- (1) In trials under this Chapter, the procedure specified in this Code for the trail of summons-case shall be followed except as hereinafter mentioned.
(2) No sentence of imprisonment for a term exceeding three months shall be passed in the case of any conviction under this Chapter.
24. So, the exception is only with regard to the quantum of sentence to be passed. So far the procedure for trial, it is as of summons trial cases.
25. Sections 255 to 259 of Cr.P.C. deal with trial in summons cases by the Magistrate wherein the relevant provision so for the issue on hand is Section 254 which deals with the procedure when not convicted in summons trial cases which is extracted here below;
"254. Procedure when not convicted.- (1) If the Magistrate does not convict the accused under Section 252 or Section 253, the Magistrate shall proceed to hear the prosecution and take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution, also to hear the accused and take all such evidence as he produces in his defence".16
Crl.A.No.1094/2018
26. So, even in case of summary trial cases, the Magistrate is required to take evidence not only of the prosecution/the complainant but also of the accused.
27. The sum and substance of the dictum rendered in the above case and the directions given therein by the Hon'ble Apex Court is with an intention to speed up the trial of Section 138 of NI Act cases by simplifying the procedures for trial.
28. It is an admitted fact that normally most of the business involve the cheque transactions and thereby the trial of cases of Section 138 of NI Act and the delay therein would affect the business field resulting impact on the State Finance/Economic condition. Considering all these facts, to simplify the procedure and thereby to speed up the trial, the above directions were given by the Hon'ble Apex Court.
29. But, the intention is not to defeat the individual right of trial. It is settled proposition of law that a fair opportunity of trial is a fundamental right of a citizen guaranteed by the Constitution of India and the Court is bound to protect it.
17
Crl.A.No.1094/2018
30. In the present case on hand, as noted above, when NBW issued against the accused was pending, the complainant was examined and on the very day, his cross examination was taken as nil and the case was adjourned for three dates i.e., on 29.01.2018, 20.02.2018 and 26.03.2018 reissuing NBW against the accused and on that date i.e., on 26.03.2018, the order was passed dispensing the statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and taking the defence evidence as nil, the matter was posted for arguments on merits. Thus, the accused was not enquired under Section 262/254 of Cr.P.C.
31. It is also pertinent to go through the relevant clauses of the provision of Section 313 of Cr.P.C. i.e., Section 313(1), (a), (b) and the proviso to the said provisions which are extracted here below;
"313. Power to examine the accused.- (1) In every enquiry or trial, for the purpose of enabling the accused personally to explain any circumstances appering in the evidence against him, the Court-
(a) may at any stage, without previously warning the accused put such questions to him as the Court considers necessary;18
Crl.A.No.1094/2018
(b) shall after the witnesses for the prosecution have been examined and before he is called on for his defence, question him generally on the case.
Provided that in a summons - case where the Court has dispensed with the personal attendance of the accused, it may also dispense with the examination under clause (b).
32. At this stage, it is also necessary to go through the provision of Section 205 of Cr.P.C. which empowers the Magistrate to dispense with the personal attendance of accused which is extracted here below;
"205.Magistrate may dispense with personal attendance of accused.- (1) Whenever a magistrate issues a summons, he may, if he sees reasons so to do, dispense with the personal attendance of the accused and permit him to appear by his pleader.
(2) But the Magistrate inquiring into or trying the case may, in his discretion, at any stage of the proceedings direct the personal attendance of the accused, and, if necessary, enforce such attendance in the manner herein before provided.
33. But, as noted above, in the present case on hand, the trial Court has not passed any order under Section 205(1) of Cr.P.C., on the other hand, NBW was ordered against the accused to secure his presence and it was returned unexecuted.
19
Crl.A.No.1094/2018
34. At this stage, it is also necessary to go through the provision of Section 273 of Cr.P.C. which mandates the Court to record the evidence in the presence of the accused and the provision of Section 317 of Cr.P.C. which deals with provision for inquiries and trial being held in the absence of accused in certain cases which are extracted here below;
273. Evidence to be taken in presence of accused.- Except as otherwise expressly provided, all evidence taken in the course of the trial or other proceeding shall be taken in the presence of the accused, or, when his personal attendance is dispensed with, in the presence of his pleader.
Provided that where the evidence of a woman below the age of eighteen years who is alleged to have been subjected to rape or any other sexual offence, is to be recorded, the court may take appropriate measures to ensure that such woman is not confronted to the accused while at the same time ensuring the right of cross - examination of the accused.) Explanation.- In this section "accused" includes a person in relation to whom any proceeding under Chapter VIII has been commenced under this Code. (Chapter VIII deals with Security for keeping the peace and for good behaviour).
317. Provision for inquiries and trial being held in the absence of accused in certain cases.- (1) At any stage of an inquiry or trial under this Code, if the Judge or Magistrate is satisfied, for reasons to be recorded, that the personal attendance of the accused before the Court is not necessary in the interest of justice, or that the accused 20 Crl.A.No.1094/2018 persistently disturbs the proceedings in Court, the Judge or Magistrate may, if the accused is represented by a pleader, dispense with his attendance and proceed with such inquiry or trial in his absence, may, at any subsequent stage of the proceedings, direct the personal attendance of such accused.
(2) If the accused in any such case is not represented by a pleader, or if the Judge or Magistrate considers his personal attendance necessary, he may, if he thinks fit and or reasons to be recorded by him, either adjourn such inquiry or trial, or order that the case of such accsued be taken up or tired separately.
35. So, the sum and substance of the above provisions is that it is mandatory for the Court to record the evidence in any trial or inquiry in the presence of the accused only. If the Court is satisfied, for the reasons to be recorded, in case, the accused is represented by his pleader, it can dispense the personal attendance of the accused and proceed with the trial.
36. In the present case on hand, of course, the accused is represented through his counsel. But, as noted above, the order sheet does not show the presence of the pleader of the accused. On the other hand, NBW was issued against the accused and the same was pending.
37. As noted above, the reason assigned for taking the defence evidence as nil is that the accused has failed to 21 Crl.A.No.1094/2018 move application under Section 145(2) of NI Act to adduce the defence evidence. So, it is necessary to go through the above provision which is extracted here below;
"145. Evidence on affidavit.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), the evidence of the complainant may be given by him on affidavit and may, subject to all just exceptions be read in evidence in any enquiry, trial or other proceeding under the said Code.
(2) The court may, if it thinks fit, and shall, on the application of the prosecution or the accused, summon and examine any person giving evidence on affidavit as to the facts contained therein.
38. The plain reading of the above provision clarifies that the evidence in case of trial for the offence under Section 138 of NI Act may be taken by an affidavit. If the Court deems fit, it may summon any witness giving evidence on affidavit and if the prosecution/complainant or the accused files an application, then it shall issue summons to any witness giving evidence on affidavit.
39. So, the facts on record prima facie show that the learned Magistrate has not properly understood the intention of the Hon'ble Apex Court in issuing such guidelines and also the directions for trial of Section 138 NI Act cases in the above noted decision in its real spirit and 22 Crl.A.No.1094/2018 also the principles of natural justice and the protection of the fundamental right of fair trial given by the Constitution to its citizen including the accused in the above provisions of law.
40. Hence, it is clear that conducting the trial in the absence of the accused and his pleader; no enquiry of the accused; non recording the statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.; non giving an opportunity to the accused to submit his say and to lead his defence evidence if any under the guise of the dictum rendered/directions given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the above decision is not proper and it is against to the natural justice and fundamental right of an accused for fair trial envisaged in the provisions of law observed above.
41. The other grounds urged by the accused in support of his present appeal are that;
a) He is financially well off and at no point of time, he has borrowed the hand loan of Rs.60,000/- and there was no need for him to borrow any loan from the complainant. 23
Crl.A.No.1094/2018
b) At no point of time, he has issued the alleged cheque in favour of the complainant against the alleged loan.
c) The complainant is his family friend and used to visit his house. By gaining entry into the house, the cheque has been taken to her possession which is not within his knowledge.
d) Immediately, after receipt of summons, when he questioned about the illegal possession of the cheque, the complainant pleaded that she will withdraw the complaint and return the cheque. Hence, he remained absent and behind his back, she has obtained the judgment and order in his absence.
e) The judgment passed by the trial Court is self contradictory, self conflicting without appreciating the evidence and without summoning the document and account extract to show that the complainant was holding amount on that particular day.
f) The complainant absolutely has no material on record to prove her case. The trial Court committed grave 24 Crl.A.No.1094/2018 error in convicting him without any iota of evidence on the record of the case; and
g) The findings given by the trial Court is illegal and unlawful which is opposed by law and facts.
42. All the above grounds are on merits of the case. As noted above, in the present case on hand, the entire trial was conducted in the absence of the accused. The impugned judgment reveal that the order of conviction is passed only based on the sworn testimony of the complainant and the documents let in by her which are not subjected to cross examination. Thus, there is no evidence on record in support of the alleged facts in the defence taken by the accused in these grounds on merits. Therefore, the accused has to fail to establish these grounds on merits.
43. However, conducting the trial in the absence of the accused, as noted above, is not only against the principles of natural justice but also to the fundamental right of a party for fair trial. Thus, the matter required to be remanded for fresh trial by giving a fair opportunity of trial to the accused.
25
Crl.A.No.1094/2018
44. Even the accused has failed to establish his grounds of appeal on merits, as he is successful in establishing his ground that he was not provided with a fair opportunity of trial, point No.1 is answered partly in affirmative and as the impugned judgment needs to be intervened, point No.2 is answered in affirmative.
45. POINT No.3:- For the reasons discussed above, I proceed to pass following order.
ORDER The Criminal Appeal filed by the appellant under Section 374(3) Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
The judgment of conviction and sentence passed by XII ACMM, Bengaluru in CC.No.28596/2015 dated 19.05.2018 is hereby set aside.
Consequently, the accused/the appellant is acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act and the matter is remanded back to the trial Court for disposal afresh in accordance with law.
The learned Magistrate is directed to dispose of the case afresh from the stage of cross of the complainant/PW- 1 by giving opportunities to both the parties.
Both the parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 30.08.2020 without fail and without expecting further notice by the trial Court and to extend their co-operation for disposal of the case as expeditiously as possible.
26
Crl.A.No.1094/2018 Send TCR along with the copy of this order forthwith to the trial Court.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer directly on computer, corrected by me and then pronounced in the open Court on this the 30th day of July 2020).
(K. KATHYAYANI ), LXVI Addl.CC & SJ, Bangalore.
27Crl.A.No.1094/2018 Both the parties and their respective counsels are absent.
The Order is pronounced in the open Court (vide separate Order).
ORDER The Criminal Appeal filed by the appellant under Section 374(3) Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
The judgment of conviction and sentence passed by XII ACMM, Bengaluru in CC.No.28596/2015 dated 19.05.2018 is hereby set aside.
Consequently, the accused/the appellant is acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act and the matter is remanded back to the trial Court for disposal afresh in accordance with law.
The learned Magistrate is directed to dispose of the case afresh from the stage of cross of the complainant/PW-1 by giving opportunities to both the parties. Both the parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 30.08.2020 without fail and without expecting further 28 Crl.A.No.1094/2018 notice by the trial Court and to extend their co-operation for disposal of the case as expeditiously as possible.
Send TCR along with the copy of this order forthwith to the trial Court.
LXVI Addl.CC & SJ, Bangalore.