GIRISH Vs. RAMACHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner has filed this revision petition for setting aside the judgment dated 30.07.2015 passed in Criminal Appeal No.3/2013 by the II Additional Sessions Judge and the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 05.12.2012 passed in C.C.No.275/2002 by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Dharwad and sought for his acquittal.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, parties herein are referred with original ranks occupied by them before the Trial Court.

(3.) The brief facts leading to the case are that the accused is a dealer in real estate business and he has entered into an agreement of sale in favour of complainant on 10.06.1999 as a GPA holder of S.S.Wadeyar in respect of the land bearing survey No.15C/2A/SP measuring 1.81 guntas for total consideration of Rs.2,40,000/-. The accused is said to have received total amount of Rs.2,00,000/- from the complainant in phase-wise but he could not complete the transaction as per the agreement and as such he has agreed to refund the earnest amount of Rs.2,00,000/- and therefore, he issued a cheque for Rs.2,00,000/- dated 01.08.2000 and when the said cheque was presented before the bank for encashment, it was dishonoured for the reason insufficient funds . Thereafter the complainant got issued a legal notice to the petitioner calling upon him to make payment of entire cheque amount, but he has failed to do so and hence, the complainant has filed a private complaint for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short the Act ). On the basis of the private complaint, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance and after recording the sworn statement of complainant and verifying the records, he issued the process against the accused. The accused appeared through his counsel and was enlarged on bail. His plea was recorded and he pleaded not guilty. The complainant got himself examined as PW1 and placed reliance on 11 documents marked at Ex.P1 to Ex.P11. The accused did not lead any defence evidence but denied the incriminating evidence appeared against him at the time of recording his statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. He has also not given any explanation in his statement recorded under 313 of Cr.P.C., except formal denial. After hearing the arguments, the learned Magistrate has convicted the accused under Section 255(2) of Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act and imposed fine of Rs.4,00,000/- with a default clause of simple imprisonment of one year.