NARENDRA PATEL, M/S KARTHIK WOODS Vs. SHAMSHUDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Revision Petition is by the accused calling in question his conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the consequent sentence imposed by the trial court to deposit Rs. 2,43,000/ - and in default to undergo eight months simple imprisonment and the said judgment being confirmed by the lower appellate court. None appears for the petitioner and there is no representation and I have heard Learned Counsel Ms. Vaishali Suvama for the respondent and perused the records of this case.

(2.) THE submission of the Learned Counsel for the respondent is that, the petitioner -accused did not avail the opportunity given to him to cross -examine P.W. 1 and, therefore, the trial court, after giving enough opportunity, ultimately took the cross -examination of P.W. 1 as nil and posted the case for defence evidence. The accused did not lead any defence evidence and also did not argue the case before the trial court. Therefore, the trial court, on the basis of the evidence placed by P.W. 1 and the documents produced, convicted the petitioner. The lower appellate court also agreed with the trial court. As such, this petition has no merit.

(3.) IN the face of such material on record, the conviction of the petitioner by the trial court and confirmed by the lower appellate court, therefore, does not call for any interference in this revision. For the above reasons, the petition is rejected.