N.HEMANTH KUMAR GOWDA Vs. Y.JANAKI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence passed by XVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore dtd. 28/4/2014 in CC.No.9277/2011 convicting him for an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 and sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs.32,10,000.00. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the judgment of the Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.505/2014 by which the judgment of conviction passed by the trial Court was confirmed.

(2.) The short facts that led to the filing of a complaint alleging an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, are that, the petitioner had agreed to purchase a site bearing No.8 from the respondent and had entered into an agreement to sell dtd. 9/11/2007 for a total sale consideration of Rs.55,00,000.00. Out of the agreed sale consideration, the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs.2,00,000.00 and the remaining Rs.53,00,000.00 was payable within three months from the date of agreement. In the meanwhile, the petitioner had also entered into an agreement to purchase the adjoining site No.9 from the respondent. The sale in respect of site No.9 was to be concluded only after execution of a sale deed and the payment of balance sale of consideration in respect of Site No.8. A sale deed dtd. 17/4/2008 was registered by the respondent in favour of the petitioner concerning site No.8 where the total sale consideration was shown as Rs.23,38,000.00 of which a sum of Rs.21,28,000.00 was shown to have been paid by cash. The respondent claimed that the petitioner had in fact passed on two cheques for Rs.12,00,000.00 and Rs.20,00,000.00 respectively, towards payment of the consideration of Rs.55,00,000.00 and had paid a sum of Rs.11,00,000.00 by cash. The said cheques on presentation by the respondent were dishonored due to insufficient funds. The respondent caused a notice of demand on 23/6/2010, which was not replied by the petitioner and the petitioner did not comply with the demand. The respondent was therefore compelled to initiate criminal prosecution against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act 1881. The summons in the proceedings were served on his plea was recorded where he pleaded not guilty and prayed that he be tried. Based on this, the trial Court recorded the evidence of respondent as PW-1 and marked exhibits as P-1 to P-11. The statement of the petitioner was recorded under Sec. 313 of CR.PC. The petitioner led defence evidence as DW-1 and marked exhibits as D-1 to D-9. Based on the oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court held that the petitioner had passed on the two cheques towards the payment of balance sale consideration as agreed under the agreement of sale dtd. 9/11/2007. It also held that by the dishonor of the cheques due to insufficient funds, the petitioner had committed an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 and thus convicted him for the offence and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.32,10,000.00 and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and sentence, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sessions Court which was dismissed following which the present revision petition is filed.