PANKAJAKSHAN Vs. SUMESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCUSED in S.T. No. 291/2011 and S.T. No. 160/2011 both on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyoli are the revision petitioner herein.

(2.) THE cases before the court below were taken on file on the basis of separate private complaints filed by the first respondent herein as complainant against the revision petitioner in both the cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter called the Act).

(3.) THE complainant filed two separate complaints, one complaint in respect of Exts. P1 and P2 cheques and another complaint in respect of Exts. P9 and P10 cheques and they were taken on file as S.T. No. 160/2011 and S.T. No. 291/2011 respectively and in both these cases, the revision petitioner appeared before the court below and particulars of the offences were read over and explained to him and he pleaded not guilty. Thereafter, on the basis of the application filed as Crl.M.P. No. 1333/2012 in S.T. No. 160/2011, joint trial was allowed and evidence was recorded in S.T. No. 160/2011. The complainant in both the cases was examined as P.W. 1 and the bank manager was examined as P.W. 2 and Exts. P1 to P16 and X1 to X3 series were marked on his side. After closure of the complainant's evidence, the revision petitioner was questioned under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (herein after called the Code) and he denied all the incriminating circumstances brought against him in the complainant's evidence. He had further stated that he had no transaction with the complainant and the cheques somehow stolen by the complainant were misused and the present complaints were filed. No evidence was adduced on the side of the accused in defence. After considering the evidence on record, the trial court found the revision petitioner guilty in both the cases under section 138 of the Act and convicted him thereunder and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment to till rising of court and also further sentence to pay the cheque amount of Rs. 60,000/ - each in both the cases as fine with default sentence of one month simple imprisonment each and directed the fine amount if realised to be paid to the complainant as compensation under section 357(1) of the Code. Though, the revision petitioner filed Crl. Appeal Nos. 416 of 2013 and 415 of 2013 before the Sessions Court, Kozhikode which were made over to II Additional Sessions Court, Kozhikode for disposal, the learned II Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the appeals confirming the order of conviction and sentence passed by the court below in both the cases. Aggrieved by the same, the above revisions were filed by the revision petitioner. Since both cases arose out of a common judgment based on common evidence, this court felt that the above revisions can be disposed of by a common order.