K G HARIDAS Vs. K D PAUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVISION petitioner is the accused in S.T.Case No.1383/03 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Perumbavoor and the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.535/06 of the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Ernakulam. He was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and sentenced to under go simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a compensation of Rs.4,000/- to the complainant, in default to under go simple imprisonment for 45 days, by the Trial Court by its judgment dated June 16, 2006. On appeal by the accused, learned Sessions Judge confirmed his conviction and the direction to pay compensation was also not interfered with. But the default sentence imposed by the trial court was set aside. Now the accused has come up in revision challenging his conviction and sentence.

(2.) THE case of the complainant/first respondent, as testified by him as PW1 before the trial Court and as detailed in the complaint in brief is this: THE accused borrowed Rs.20,000/- from the complainant on February 25, 2002. Towards repayment of Rs.3,000/-, out of the afore said amount, the accused issued Exhibit P1 cheque dated June 10, 2002 for Rs.3,000/- in favour of the complainant which when presented for collection returned dishonored for want of sufficiency of funds in the account of the revision petitioner in the bank and that inspite of the notice of Exhibit P5 the accused did not repay the amount, which is an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant/accused and counsel for the complainant.