VISWALAL V Vs. ESI CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision petitioners are the accused 1 and 2 in CC No. 141/1997 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class - III, Thrissur. The first respondent herein prosecuted the revision petitioners accusing offence under S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act), with a plea that the first revision petitioner is the managing partner of the 2nd revision petitioner firm and a sum of Rs.1,66,500/- was due to the first respondent from the firm towards the ESI contribution and in discharge of the same Ext. P5 cheque dated 29/04/1997 for the said amount drawn on the Corporation Bank, Pallikummu Branch, Kollam was issued by the revision petitioners and that when Ext. P5 was sent for collection it was returned dishonoured for insufficient funds as evidenced by Exts. P6 and P7 memos. Despite the acknowledgement of the notice demanding discharge, as evidenced by Exts. P9 and P10, the liability was not discharged.

(2.) The revision petitioners pleaded not guilty. Therefore they were sent for trial. On the side of the prosecution PWs 1 and 2 were examined. Exts. P1 to P14 were marked. After closing the evidence for the prosecution, when questioned under S.313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the revision petitioners took a plea of total denial. No defence evidence was let in. On appraisal of the evidence, the Trial Court arrived at a finding of guilty. Consequently, the revision petitioners were convicted and the first revision petitioner was sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the Court with direction to pay Rs.87,000/- as compensation to the first respondent, after taking note that during the pendency of the proceedings, Rs.86,000/- was remitted by the revision petitioners.

(3.) Aggrieved by the above conviction and sentence, Crl A 505/2001 was preferred before the Sessions Judge, Thrissur. The III Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc - I), by the impugned judgment, while confirming the conviction and the sentence, dismissed the appeal. Assailing the legality, correctness and propriety of the above conviction and sentence as confirmed in appeal, this revision petition is preferred.