PRAKASAN N V Vs. MANAPPURAM GENERAL FINANCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in this Crl.R.P. is against the conviction and sentence imposed on the revision petitioner who is the accused in a prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner is that PW1 has admitted regarding the payment of 8 instalments and also the receipt of certain other amount. It is also the contention of the learned counsel that the vehicle was subsequently repossessed by the complainant and the same was sold for an amount of Rs.60,000/-. Thus according to him, no liabilities due to the complainant. According to the learned counsel the above vital aspect was not properly considered by the trial court as well as the appellate court. THE another point raised by the learned counsel is that who was PW1 examined on behalf of the complainant has no direct knowledge with the transaction and therefore, according to the learned counsel complainant miserably failed to establish the case. It is also the submission of the learned counsel that no document was produced in support of the case of the complainant.

(3.) THEREFORE, I find no reason to interfere with the sentence also. In the result, this revision petition is devoid of any merit and accordingly, dismissed.