SANTOSH S.LAD Vs. ROCKLINE ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Revision Petition No.87/2019 has been filed by the petitioner-accused challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment passed in Crl.A.No.941/2017 dated 20.12.2018 and Criminal Revision Petition No.133/2019 has been filed by the petitioner-complainant challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment passed by the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in Crl.A.No.1195/2018.

(2.) I have heard the Senior Counsel Sri Prabhuling K. Navadagi appearing on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and the learned counsel for the respondent-complainant in both the cases.

(3.) The gist of the complaint as per the case of the complainant before the Court below is that one M/s Media One Global Entertainment Ltd., represented by its Director engaged in the business activities was badly in need of funds to clear the loan amount of Rs.6,00,00,000/- which had been availed from one M/s Sheetal Developers. Accused approached the complainant and requested to save M/s Media One Global Entertainment Ltd., from its debt by lending a sum of Rs.6,00,00,000/- by assuring the complainant that the accused himself would repay the same. On the request and assurance made by the accused, the complainant agreed to clear the loan of said M/s Media One Global Entertainment Ltd., and in furtherance of the assurance by accused, the complainant issued Demand Draft bearing No.013674 dated 17.11.2014 drawn on Axis Bank, Peenya Branch, Bengaluru in favour of M/s Sheetal Developers and the same was encashed. The accused had assured the complainant and agreed to discharge the said liability and had issued 10 cheques bearing Nos.000201, 000202, 000203, 000204, 000205, 000206, 000207, 000208, 000209, 000210 all dated 12.5.2015 drawn on HDFC Bank Limited, Miller Road, Bengaluru and the same was reduced into writing by an agreement dated 24.11.2014. Subsequently, out of 10 cheques, accused sought return of 3 cheques agreeing to repay the same in cash in due course of time. On the request of the accused, the complainant presented the said cheques for encashment through M/s Syndicate Bank and all the cheques were dishonoured with shara 'Funds Insufficient' on 14.5.2015. Thereafter, the complainant communicated the said fact to the accused, at that time, accused requested to present all seven cheques for encashment. Accordingly, on 23.5.2015 he presented the said cheques for encashment and the same have been dishonoured with shara 'Funds Insufficient' on 25.05.2015. Thereafter, the complainant got issued legal notice dated 12.06.2015. The same was served on the accused. The accused issued reply notice on untenable grounds dated 24.11.2014. Since he became the defaulter, a private complaint was registered against the accused. Thereafter, the Trial Court took cognizance and secured the presence of the accused. After following the due procedure, the plea of the accused was recorded. Accused pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried, as such the trial was fixed.