VIRENDER SONI Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this revision petition is a judgment dated 02.03.2016 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Crl.A.No. 60/2015 by which judgment dated 27.08.2015 and sentence order dated 28.10.2015 in CC No. 79/1/14 instituted under Sec. 138 Negotiable Instruments Act were upheld. The petition is contested by the complainant/respondent.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Admitted position is that a complaint case under Sec. 138 Negotiable Instruments Act was instituted by the respondent against the petitioner. In the complaint, the respondent averred that in the discharge of legally enforceable liability, the petitioner had issued a cheque for the sum of Rs. 21.5 lacs bearing No. 978785 dated 28.03.2010 drawn on Syndicate Bank, Dev Nagar, New Delhi in his favour. On presentation, the cheque was dishonoured due to 'insufficient funds'. Despite issuance of legal notice dated 31.5.2010, the petitioner failed to pay the amount within the stipulated time. The respondent examined himself as CW-1. In 313 Crimial P.C. statement, the petitioner denied issuance of the cheque in question. He examined DW- 1 (Deepak Jain) in defence. The trial resulted in his conviction. The appeal preferred against the conviction did not find favour before the appellate court and was dismissed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the impugned orders cannot be sustained as the Trial Courts overlooked the crucial point if the respondent had paying capacity to advance Rs. 21.50 lacs to the petitioner. No such amount was reflected by the respondent in the Income Tax Returns. He, being a petty newspaper vendor, did not have financial capacity to give huge loan to the petitioner. It was further urged that the petitioner at the time of taking a loan of Rs. 5 lacs from the respondent in 2007, had issued a blank cheque as a 'security'. The said loan was repaid in 2009 but the respondent did not hand over the cheque on the pretext that it was lost. The said cheque has been misused.