R. DIVAKAR Vs. H.S. KAMALAKANTH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the concurrent judgment convicting the petitioner for an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'NI Act, 1881' for short) as well as the consequent sentence.

(2.) The facts as stated, in brief are that the petitioner and respondent were known to each other as they were earlier residents of Bhadravathi. The respondent claims to have paid a sum of Rs.3,00,000.00 to the petitioner as a hand loan during the month of April-2015 in the presence of a common friend named Sri.Prakash. Later, the petitioner handed over a cheque dtd. 30/6/2015 for a sum of Rs.3,00,000.00. The said cheque was dishonoured due to insufficient funds when it was presented to bank. The respondent issued a notice that was addressed to the business premises of the wife of the petitioner. Though the petitioner was aware of the notice, he did not accept the same and therefore, the respondent filed a private complaint to take cognizance of an offence committed by the petitioner under Sec. 138 of NI Act, 1881. The sworn statement of the petitioner was recorded and CC.No.21198/2015 was registered. The trial Court took cognizance and issued summons to the petitioner and thereafter, recorded the plea of the petitioner. The petitioner pleaded not guilty and prayed that he be tried. Consequent thereto, the respondent was examined as PW.1 and he marked Exs.P1 to P5. He also examined the common friend-Mr.Prakash as PW.2. The statement of the petitioner was recorded under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. The petitioner did not enter the witness box but he confronted Exs.D1 to PW.1, which was marked subject to proof.

(3.) The trial Court after considering the oral and documentary evidence held that the petitioner had admitted certain financial transactions between him and the respondent and it also held that the signatures found on Ex.P1 belonged to the petitioner and that the petitioner was able to establish his defence that he had paid a sum of Rs.1,50,000.00 to the respondent and therefore, held that the respondent had proved the transaction and that the cheque in question was issued towards discharge of a lawful debt and thus, convicted the petitioner for an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of NI Act, 1881 and sentenced the petitioner to pay a fine of Rs.1,000.00 and awarded compensation of Rs.1,50,000.00 with simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of cheque, till realization. An appeal preferred there from by the petitioner was dismissed.