LAWS(KER)-2011-11-27

SEENATH Vs. T JOYSON

Decided On November 17, 2011
SEENATH Appellant
V/S
T.JOYSON Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision is by the accused, who has been convicted of the offence - under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short "the Act"), concurrently by the two courts below. The trial magistrate, on conviction of the accused, has sentenced her to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 70,000/- with default term of simple imprisonment for two months more. Fine amount, if realised, was directed to be paid to the complainant as compensation. In appeal, the Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction and sentence without any modification. Feeling aggrieved, the accused has preferred this revision.

(2.) The first respondent is the complainant. He filed a complaint against the revision petitioner/accused alleging that a cheque issued by her towards discharge of a liability to him was dishonoured on presentation. When intimation of dishonour was given over phone he was directed to meet the accused to collect the sum. He went over to her house and, on demand, showed the dishonoured cheque. She snatched and got hold of a portion of the cheque and destroyed it. Later a notice intimating dishonour with demand of the sum covered by the cheque was issued, in which the incident referred to partial destruction of that instrument was also narrated. A reply denying the transaction and issuing of cheque to him, and also the aforesaid incident alleged, was given by the accused. Producing the portion of the cheque, which remained with the complainant, with such portion containing the signature of the drawer, he filed a complaint to prosecute the accused for the offence u/S. 138 of the Act. Both the courts below, on the materials tendered, negativing the challenges raised by the accused denying the transaction with the complainant and issuing of any cheque to him, found her guilty, and convicted and sentenced her as aforesaid. Impeaching the propriety, legality and, in fact, the very sustainability of the prosecution of the accused for the offence under Section 138 of the Act, the revision has been filed assailing her conviction.

(3.) I heard the counsel on both sides.