B.R. VASANTHA KOKILA Vs. SUJAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE are concurrent findings of Courts below that petitioner (accused) has committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Heard the learned counsel for parties.

(2.) THE law is fairly well settled that this Court while exercising re visional jurisdiction, does not sit as a Court of Second Appeal. This Court can interfere with the impugned judgment if it is demonstrated that the Courts below have committed glaring errors in appreciation of evidence or errors of law resulting manifest injustice to petitioner.

(3.) THE accused having pleaded the aforestated special and peculiar circumstances to rebut the evidence adduced by complainant and also presumption available under Section 139 of the N.I. Act, has failed to substantiate the same.