SUNIL KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revisionist, having suffered conviction and sentence before both courts below under Sec. 138 Negotiable Instruments Act has filed this petition invoking revisional jurisdiction of this Court to assail the appellate judgment passed by the learned Principal District & Sessions Judge. I have heard learned counsel for both sides and examined the trial court record.

(2.) Broadly speaking, the present respondent no. 2 filed a complaint against the revisionist under Sec. 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, pleading the factual matrix as follows. The revisionist and the respondent no. 2 were maintaining good friendly relations and the revisionist used to borrow money from respondent no. 2 for investment purposes and used to return the same with profits. In the month of June 2016, the revisionist again approached respondent no. 2 with the request to provide loan of Rs.12,00,000.00 for a period of one year as he wanted to purchase some property in Lucknow. Relying upon their previous relationship, the respondent no. 2 gave cash amount to the revisionist in two instalments, namely, Rs.7,00,000.00 on 28/7/2016 and Rs.5,00,000.00 on 12/8/2016. As per respondent no. 2, she arranged the said cash amount by withdrawing money from her bank account. Towards part repayment of the loan, the revisionist issued cheque dtd. 8/10/2017 of Rs.9,00,000.00 to respondent no. 2. But the said cheque on being presented got dishonoured with the remarks: "drawer's signatures differ".

(3.) On being summoned under Sec. 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, the revisionist pleaded not guilty in response to notice under Sec. 251 CrPC and pleaded that he had misplaced the said cheque, regarding which he also lodged a complaint dtd. 29/12/2016 with his bank, besides making a complaint to the police.