MOHANAKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 28.03.2012 rendered by the First Additional Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram, in Crl.Appeal No.343 of 2009, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge allowed the appeal in part, confirming the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the NI Act ') and modifying the sentence rendered by the trial court to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and also to pay a compensation of Rs.75,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months more under Section 138 of the NI Act.

(2.) The revision petitioner was the accused in ST No. 527 of 2006 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-VIII, Thiruvananthapuram and the appellant in Crl.Appeal No. 343 of 2009 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court-I, Thiruvananthapuram. The 2nd respondent filed a complaint before the trial court alleging commission of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act against the accused. Upon consideration of the complaint, the learned magistrate is prima facie satisfied that the case is made out against the accused. Hence, the learned magistrate took cognizance of the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act and the case was taken on file as ST No. 527 of 2006. Parties are hereinafter referred to as the 'complainant' and 'accused' according to their status in the court below unless otherwise stated.

(3.) It is the case of the complainant that the accused borrowed a sum of Rs.70,000/- from the complainant and issued a cheque dated 01.03.2004 for Rs.70,000/- drawn on the account maintained by the accused with the Canara Bank, Puthenchantha Branch, Thiruvananthapuram. The complainant presented the cheque for encashment before the State of Bank of Travancore, Manacaud Branch, but, the cheque was dishonoured for the reason, 'funds insufficient'. Statutory notice was issued on 15.04.2004 to the accused calling upon him to pay the amount. The accused received the legal notice on 21.04.2004 and issued reply notice dated 30.04.2004, denying the liability covered under the cheque.