K. KRISHNANKUTTY Vs. MURALEEDHARAN PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN discharge of an amount of 1,00,000/ - borrowed by the revision petitioner from the 1st respondent, the revision petitioner issued a cheque dated 15.2.2007. When the 1st respondent presented it for collection, the cheque was bounced due to insufficiency of funds, and the revision petitioner failed to make payment in spite of statutory notice. In such a situation, the 1st respondent brought complaint before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class -II, Thiruvananthapuram alleging the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) THE revision petitioner entered appearance and claimed to be tried. The complainant examined himself as PW1 and marked Exts.P1 to P6 during trial. The revision petitioner denied the incriminating circumstances, when examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. But, he did not adduce any evidence in defence to prove or probabilise his case, that he had no connection or transaction with the complainant, that the cheque in question was handed over to one Lakshmanan and that the complainant somehow procured the cheque from Lakshmanan and filed a false complaint.

(3.) AGGRIEVED by the conviction and sentence, the revision petitioner approached the Court of Session with Crl. A. No. 19 of 2013. In appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Neyyattinkara confirmed the conviction and sentence, and accordingly, dismissed the appeal by judgment dated 26.2.2014. Now the accused is before this Court in revision, challenging the legality and propriety of the conviction and sentence.