(1.) The petitioner has challenged the judgment of conviction dtd. 5/10/2012 passed by the XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.No.60963/2009 for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as ' NI Act, 1881' for short) and the consequent sentence to pay fine of Rs.11,00,000.00 and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. The petitioner has also assailed the correctness of the judgment of the Appellate Court dtd. 28/10/2013 passed by the Incharge Fast Track Court-III, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru in Crl.A.No.25145/2012, by which, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court was upheld.
(2.) The complaint lodged by the respondent before the trial Court discloses that the petitioner was the owner of certain land in Bileshivale Village, Bidarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru East Taluk, Bengaluru. He claimed that he had promoted a layout of sites in the aforesaid land, by marketing the sites to various parties and that substantial sums of money were collected from such purchasers, which were paid to the petitioner. However, the petitioner was unable to register and convey the sites so agreed. The petitioner is stated to have refunded a sum of Rs.10,00,000.00, in terms of two cheques bearing Nos.800286 dtd. 1/11/2008 and 800287 dtd. 1/12/2008 for Rs.5,00,000.00 each. The respondent claimed that the said cheques were dishonoured due to insufficient funds, when presented with his banker for encashment. The respondent caused a notice of demand on 27/2/2009, which was served, however, the petitioner did not reply or repay the amount demanded in the notice. The respondent alleged that the petitioner had therefore committed an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of NI Act, 1881 and initiated prosecution of the petitioner. The sworn statement of the respondent was recorded and C.C.No.60963/2009 was registered and process was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner appeared before the Court and pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The respondent was examined as PW.1 and he marked Exs.P1 to P9. The statement of the petitioner was recorded under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. and he denied the incriminating evidence against him and offered to lead defense evidence. The petitioner was examined as DW.1 and a copy of the agreement of sale dtd. 20/1/2006 was marked through the respondent as Ex.D1.
(3.) Based on the oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court held that the cheque in question was drawn by the petitioner towards discharge of a debt namely towards reimbursement of the sale consideration paid by the clients of the respondent who had purchased sites from the petitioner and therefore, the said cheques were drawn towards discharge of a lawful debt and due to the dishonour of the said cheques due to the insufficient funds, the petitioner had committed an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of NI Act, 1881. The trial Court convicted him for the said offence and sentenced him to pay fine of Rs.11,00,000.00. Being aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction, the petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No.25145/2012. The Appellate Court secured the records of the trial Court and after hearing both the parties, it framed point for consideration and thereafter, disposed off the appeal and upheld the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court.