MRS FIONA ALOYSIUS Vs. ELFRIDA PINTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two criminal revision petitions are between the same parties and arise out of the same transaction, and therefore, with the consent of the learned Counsel on both sides, the petitions were clubbed, heard together and are disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

(3.) Facts leading to filing of these two revision petitions narrated briefly are, the petitioners herein allegedly approached the respondent-complainant in the year 2005 with a request to invest in their proposed company and they promised that the respondent would get high returns on her investment and being attracted by the representation made by the petitioners, the respondent had invested an amount of Rs.10.00 lakhs with the petitioners which was paid by her through two separate cheques. The petitioners allegedly promised to return 50% of the investment in the first year and another 50% in the second year and the investment amount was renewable for further period at the option of the respondent. However, the petitioners had not kept their promise, and therefore, the respondent repeatedly insisted for payment of the returns as promised. Petitioners, therefore, had issued five cheques for a sum of Rs.2.00 lakhs each towards dividend/returns on the investment. The said cheques were realized by the respondent. Thereafter, she had approached the petitioners and demanded for return of principal amount and the petitioners had, therefore, issued two postdated cheques dtd. 31/3/2008 for Rs.5.00 lakhs each in favour of the respondent. The said two cheques, on presentation for realization, were dishonoured by the drawee bank with an endorsement "payment stopped by the drawer". The complainant, thereafter, got issued legal notice to the petitioners on 15/5/2008 which was sent by RPAD as well as certificate of posting. Inspite of service of the said legal notice, the petitioners did not pay the amount covered under the cheques nor had they issued any reply to the legal notice. It is under these circumstances, the respondent had filed two separate criminal complaints against the petitioners under Sec. 200 Cr.PC for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'the Act'). After the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance of the offence alleged in the complaint, criminal cases were registered against the petitioners in C.C.Nos.32606/2008 & 32607/2008.