BADHUSHA Vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was convicted by the learned Magistrate for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. In appeal the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction but modified the sentence to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay Rs. 1,50,000/ - to the complainant as compensation. The petitioner was directed to appear before the Magistrate on 14.12.2011.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the verdict of conviction also. It is submitted that the evidence adduced on the side of the complainant -Bank was simply accepted by the courts below ignoring the contention raised by the accused that only a signed blank cheque leaf was given when he had availed loan and exorbitant amount was subsequently written on Ext.P1. It is further contended that there is no legal evidence to show that a total amount of Rs. 1,43,789/ - was actually due from the petitioner. The learned Magistrate has analysed the evidence and came to the conclusion that Ext.P1 cheque was issued by the accused to discharge a legally enforceable debt. That finding was confirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. I have gone through the judgments of the courts below. I find no reason to upset that finding. The conviction is to be thus confirmed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that actually the amount as shown in the complaint was not due. However, he is ready to pay the amount for which sufficient time may be granted. Considering all the aspects, the Crl. R.P. is disposed of as stated below: