N. KRISHNA REDDY Vs. SANJAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Petition is filed challenging the judgment of acquittal recorded by the Fast Track (Sessions). Judge, Bangalore City (F.T.C. NO. VI) in Crl. Appeal No. 1194/2007, whereby the learned Sessions Judge set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed against the respondent by the XX ACMM and XXII ASCJ, Bangalore City, wherein the respondent/accused was convicted under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, sentenced to pay a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/ - i.e. double the cheque amount and he further directed that out of which a sum of Rs. 29,50,000/ - shall be paid to the complainant and balance of Rs. 50,000/ - shall be credited to the State Government. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed before the Trial Court.

(2.) THE relevant facts leading to filing of this Revision Petition are as hereunder: The Complainant was working as Medical Officer in NIMHANS Hospital, Bangalore. On 14.10.2003 the accused approached the complainant for hand loan of Rs. 15,00,000/ - for his real estate business. The complainant therefore, gave hand loan of Rs. 15,00,000/ - to the accused. Thereafter, the accused issued a cheque bearing No. 657498 dated 26.04.2004 drawn on ICICI Bank, Bangalore Cantonment Branch, Bangalore for a sum of Rs. 15,00,000/ -. The complainant presented the cheque through his Banker State Bank of Mysore, Wilson Garden Branch, Bangalore. But the same was returned on 28.04.2004 with an endorsement 'account closed'. Thereafter, the complainant got issued legal notice dated 24.05.2004 through registered post acknowledgment due and the notice sent under UCP was duly served on the accused. But the accused deliberately avoided the notice sent under registered post. When the accused failed to comply with the demand of notice, the complainant filed the complaint before the Trial Court invoking the provision of Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) CONSIDERING the oral and documentary evidence produced by both the parties, the Trial Court observed that the complainant who is working as Medical Officer in NIMHANS Hospital and was drawing salary of Rs. 22,000/ - per month and also getting rent from the building owned by him and also getting income from agricultural properties, having capacity to lend the amount and that the accused has failed to rebut the presumption under Section 138 of N.I. Act. Accordingly, the Trial Court found the accused guilt of the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act and passed the above order of conviction and sentence.