9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (6) TMI 635X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 18th May, 2006 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Solapur in Summary Trial Case No. 49998 of 2003. By the said judgment and order, the learned Magistrate has acquitted the respondent/original accused, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. The case of the complainant is that it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Exh. 45) and letter dated 28th February, 2003 (Exh. 46) came to be sent to the accused. Both these letters mention that an amount of ₹ 3,85,311/- was due from the accused. P.W.-3 Suresh Dabhade in his cross-examination has stated that out of the said amount of ₹ 3,85,311/-, Rs. one lakh was received by cheque. ₹ 92,019/- was received in February, 2003 and ₹ 1,30,000/- was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ques and putting it in the bank. The complainant has admitted in his cross-examination that it is true that the ink in respect of the date and signature on the cheque is similar, and the ink in which the amount and name of payee was written, is different. The complainant has further stated that he cannot tell which part of the cheque is written by the accused. From the evidence on record it appear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
