PADMANABHA Vs. GOPALAKRISHNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the concurrent judgments of conviction and sentence passed against him in CC No. 61/2010 passed by the Court of the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC., Bantwal, D.K., affirmed by the III Addl. District & Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangalore vide Judgment dtd. 30/12/2011, has preferred this revision.

(2.) Parties to this revision are referred to as per their rank before the trial court for convenience.

(3.) Brief facts leading up to this revision are as under: complainant and accused were known to each other. In the first week of January 2007, accused borrowed a sum of Rs.38,000.00 to meet his urgent needs with an assurance to repay the same within thirty days to together with interest at the rate of 15% p.a. It is the case of the complainant that, he advanced the said loan amount and in the first week of February 2007, he requested the accused to repay the said amount. In discharge of the said debt, accused issued two cheques dtd. 15/2/2007 for Rs.19,000.00 each drawn on Vijaya Bank, Vitla Branch. Complainant presented the said cheques for encashment. But, they were dishonoured for want of "insufficient funds" in the account of the accused as per memo dtd. 4/6/2007 issued by the Bank. Once again, the complainant presented the said cheques but, they were again dishonoured. Therefore, complainant got issued a statutory notice on 7/6/2007 calling upon the accused to pay the cheque amount. The said notice was duly served on the accused on 9/6/2007 but, he has issued a false reply on 14/6/2007. Therefore, complainant presented the complaint under Sec.200 of Cr.PC against the accused for the offence punishable under Sec. .138 of the NI Act.