PRAVEEN KUMAR Vs. ABDUL ASIF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petitioner as the accused was tried by the Court of the learned J.M.F.C (IV Court) Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the "Trial Court") in C.C.No.2367/2008 for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the "N.I. Act") and was convicted for the said offence by its judgment of conviction and order on sentence dtd. 18/2/2009. Aggrieved by the same, the accused preferred a Criminal Appeal in the Court of the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore,(hereinafter for brevity referred to as the "Sessions Judge's Court") in Criminal Appeal No.104/2009. The appeal was contested by the respondent who was the complainant in the Trial Court. The Sessions Judge's Court in its order dtd. 2/8/2011 dismissed the appeal, confirming the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the Trial Court dtd. 18/2/2009 in C.C.No.2367/2008. Aggrieved by the said order, the accused has preferred this revision petition.

(2.) The summary of the case of the complainant in the Trial Court is that, through one Sri. Surendra, the accused came in acquaintance with the complainant in the year 2004. At the specific demand made by the accused for hand loan of a sum of Rs.1,00,000.00the complainant gave him the said loan of Rs. l,00,000/- on 3/11/2004 through a cheque bearing No.154419 dtd. 3/11/2004 drawn on Corporation Bank Limited, Pandeshwar Branch, Mangalore. The accused had agreed to repay the said loan amount without any interest there upon within twelve months. Thereafter, towards the dischargal of the said liability, the accused issued a cheque bearing No.351399 dtd. 1/9/2005 for a sum of Rs. l,00,000/- drawn on Vijaya Bank, Koramangala Branch, Bangalore in favour of the complainant. When the said cheque was presented for its realisation, it came to be dis-honoured with the Banker's shara of ^funds insufficient' and thereafter demanding the cheque amount, the complainant also got issued a legal notices to the accused. However, the accused neither received the legal notice nor met the demand made in the legal notice. This constrained the complainant to institute a case against him for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act, in the Trial Court.

(3.) The accused appeared through his counsel and contested the matter.