VIJENDRA Vs. S.D. HOSAMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated 17.03.2007 passed by the Fast Track Court-II, Bagalkot in Crl.A. No.28/2006 acquitting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1981 (for short 'the Act') thereby reversing the judgment of conviction dated 30.06.2008 passed by the I Additional JMFC., Bagalkot at Bagalkot in C.C. No.1260/2002 whereunder, the learned Magistrate was pleased to convict the accused and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,75,000/- with a direction that out of the fine amount of Rs.1,75,000/- collected from the accused a sum of Rs.1,70,000/- be paid to the complainant by way of compensation.

(2.) The complainant filed a complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. against the accused before the JMFC., Bagalkot alleging that he is a practicing Advocate at Bagalkot, Dharwad and Labour Court, Bijapur and the accused is the friend of the complainant since 10 years and accused was working as a F.D.A. in the Evaluation Department of Karnataka University Dharwad.

(3.) It is the case of the complainant that accused was in need of money for his domestic problems and therefore, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the accused. The accused had promised to return the amount within four to five months and when the complainant demanded the said amount, the accused issued a cheque bearing No.792100 on 20.05.2006 for Rs.1,50,000/- drawn on the State Bank of India, Karnataka University Campus, Dharwad Branch. It is the case of the complainant that the said cheque when presented was dishonoured for insufficient funds and thereafter the complainant issued a statutory notice on 11.06.2007 to the accused. Though the accused has received the said notice, he has not replied to the notice issued by the complainant nor paid the cheque amount. Therefore, the accused has committed the offences punishable under Sections 138 and 142 of the Act. On filing of the complaint, the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and issued summons to the accused.