PICHANDI Vs. INDIRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petitioner as the accused was tried by the Court of the learned III Addl. Civil Judge and J.M.F.C, Shivamogga, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the "Trial Court") in C.C.No.198/2009 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. 5/12/2011.

(2.) The summary of the case of the complainant in the Trial Court was that the accused was a timber dealer and also contractor in Shivamogga. The complainant approached the accused for the supply of timber for construction of their house. After negotiation, it was agreed between the parties that the complainant should pay an advance amount of Rs.95,000.00, as such, in three installments of Rs.25,000.00, Rs.25,000.00 plus Rs.45,000.00, the complainant in total paid a sum of Rs.95,000.00 to the accused between February to August in the year 2008. Even after receiving the advance amount, the accused did not supply the timber, as such, at the demand made by the complainant for the return of the amount paid to him, the accused issued a cheque baring No.065686 dtd. 25/9/2008 for a sum of Rs.95,000.00 drawn in favour of the complainant on State Bank of India, Sir M.V.road branch, Shivamogga. On presentation of the said cheque for realization by the complainant, the same was returned unpaid with the banker's endorsement "Funds Insufficient". The complainant got issued a legal notice to the accused demanding the cheque amount, after seven days enquiry, the said notice was returned to the complainant, however, the accused even after knowing the fact of dishonor of the cheque and the demand for cheque amount, failed to repay the said amount which constrained the complainant to institute a criminal case against him in the Trial Court in C.C.No.198/2009 for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent are physically present in the Court.