CHIKKAHONNAIAH Vs. BASAMMA @ BINDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was the accused in the Court of learned XIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court) in C.C. No.17510/2005 who was tried for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act , 1881 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as 'the N.I. Act ').

(2.) The summary of the case of the complainant in the Trial Court is that the accused had borrowed a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- from her on 07.03.2004 as loan for the purpose of purchasing a building property. The accused had agreed to repay the said loan amount on demand. Accordingly, the accused issued a cheque bearing No.209580 dated 07.11.2004 drawn on Syndicate Bank, Rajajinagar II Stage Branch, Bengaluru for a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- favouring the complainant towards the repayment of the loan amount. The said cheque when presented for clearing from the complainant's banker, came to be returned dishonoued with the banker's endorsement "funds insufficient". Thereafter the complainant issued a legal notice dated 13.01.2005. The accused did not claim the notice sent through 'registered post acknowledgement due', as such, it was returned to the sender. However, the notice which was sent through 'certificate of posting' was duly served upon the accused. Still the accused neither responded to the notice nor paid the demanded cheque amount. Hence, the complainant instituted a criminal case against the accused in the Trial Court, for the offence punishable under S.138 of the N.I. Act. Since the accused pleaded not guilty, the trial was held wherein the complainant got herself examined as PW-1 and got marked documents from Exs.P1 to P10. The accused did not adduce any oral or documentary evidence on his behalf. The Trial Court, after hearing arguments from both side and considering the material on record, by its impugned Judgment of conviction and Order on sentence dated 12.07.2007, convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced him accordingly.

(3.) Aggrieved by the Judgment of the Trial Court, the accused preferred an appeal in the Court of Fast Track (Sessions) Judge - V, Bangalore City (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as 'Session Judge's Court') in Crl.A. No.891/2007. The said Court, by its Order dated 10.01.2011 while confirming the Judgment of conviction passed by the Trial Court, dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the accused has preferred this revision petition.