MAHENDRAN ASARI Vs. R. ANIL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against a concurrent verdict of guilty and conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The sentence imposed by the trial court was modified and reduced by the appellate court.

(2.) THE cheque is for an amount of Rs. 17,000/ -. According to the complainant, the accused had borrowed an amount of Rs. 17,000/ - and had issued Ext.P1 cheque for Rs. 17,000/ -. The direction in the cheque was to pay the amount by cash. The same was presented. It was dishonoured on the ground of insufficiency of fund. Notice of demand was issued. The same was duly acknowledged. There was no reply sent to the notice of demand. The complainant scrupulously followed the statutory time table. The amount was not paid. The complainant came to court with the complaint.

(3.) THE courts below considered the question of complicity. They came to the conclusion that the complainant had succeeded in proving all the ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The courts found that the cheque was issued by the accused to the complainant for the due discharge of a legally enforcible debt/liability. Accordingly, the courts below proceeded to pass the impugned verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence. The appellate court had modified the sentence of fine. The same was reduced from Rs. 17,000/ - to Rs. 5,000/ -. The revision petitioner now faces a sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/ -.