SANTHOSH D. NAYAK Vs. PAUL MAHESH SOANS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) N . Ananda, J. -There are concurrent findings of courts below that petitioner is guilty of an offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'the Act'). Therefore, he is before this court. I have heard Sri K. Shashikanth Prasad, learned counsel for petitioner (accused) and Sri H. Jayakara Shetty, learned counsel for respondent (complainant).

(2.) THIS court while exercising revisional jurisdiction under section 401 Cr.P.C., does not sit as a court of second appeal. This court can interfere with the impugned judgment if the courts below have committed glaring errors in appreciation of evidence or errors of law resulting manifest injustice to petitioner.

(3.) THIS submission is contrary to the contents of order sheet. The learned trial Judge had given sufficient opportunity to cross -examine respondent (complainant), however such opportunity was not availed. Time and again, petitioner (accused) had filed applications under section 311 Cr.P.C., which were allowed on payment of costs, however petitioner (accused) had not obeyed the orders. The petitioner (accused) had made farce of entering into settlement and filed a joint memo, on 22.09.2007, trial court passed the following order: - Case called before Lok Adalath. Accused present and counsel for the accused present. Both the parties have filed joint memo. Perused the joint memo. As per joint memo the accused admitted to pay the said amount of Rs. 75,000/ - in each installment containing Rs. 25,000/ - within 3 months from the date of joint memo. In view of the said joint memo, the case is compromised. Accordingly, call on for payment of 1st installment by 10 -10 -07. Thereafter, petitioner did not adhere to terms and conditions arrived in terms of joint memo. The learned trial Judge had issued non -bailable warrant to secure petitioner (accused).