SRI. KHAJAMAINUDDIN Vs. SRI. ABDUL RAJAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petitioner was accused in C.C.No.1857/2013 in the Court of Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Hospete (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial Court', for brevity), against whom the present respondent as a complainant had instituted a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C., 1973 for the offences punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the N.I. Act', for short)

(2.) The summary of the case of the complainant in the trial Court is that, the present petitioner (accused in the trial Court) was known to him since several years. Making use of the said acquaintance, the accused had availed a hand loan of a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- from him on 18.02.2013 and agreed to repay the same within a short period. At the repeated request by the complainant, the accused on 10.04.2013, issued a cheque to him bearing No.250682 for a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- drawn on ING Vysya Bank Ltd., Hosapete. When presented for encashment, the said cheque was returned unpaid with the endorsement 'funds insufficient'. Thereafter, the complainant got issued a legal notice to the accused through his counsel on 19.04.2013, which also invited no response from the accused. This made the complainant to file a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C., 1973 After following due presses of law, recording the evidence led by the parties and hearing both parties, the trial Court by its judgment dated 12.08.2015, convicted the accused for the offences punishable under sections 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced the accused to pay a fine of Rs. 1,60,000/- and in default of payment of fine amount, sentenced the accused to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months. Out of the fine amount, a sum of Rs. 1,55,000/- was ordered to be paid to the complainant as compensation as contemplated under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C., 1973 Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction passed by the trial Court, the accused preferred an appeal in Criminal Appeal No.5035/2015 in the Court of III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ballari (hereinafter referred to as 'the Sessions Court' for brevity). The said Court after hearing both sides and perusing the materials placed before it, by its judgment dated 23.08.2016, dismissed the appeal filed by the accused. It is against the said judgment, the accused before the trial Court has preferred the present revision petition.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for both parties.