C. BIJU Vs. MOHANAKUMARAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in S.T No. 142/2010 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court -III, Nedumangad, the accused therein has come up in revision. A cheque for 2, 25, 000/ - issued by him in favour of the 1st respondent herein in discharge of a debt was dishonoured due to insufficient of funds. When he failed to make payment on demand, the 1st respondent initiated prosecution before the trial court.

(2.) THE revision petitioner entered appearance in the trial court and pleaded not guilty to the accusations. During trial, he maintained a defence that he had no transaction with the complainant, and that a cheque issued by him as security in a transaction of borrowal made by his brother was in fact utilised by the complainant to bring a false claim. The complainant examined himself as PW1 and also marked Exts.P1 to P5. One witness was also examined on the side of the complainant as PW2. In defence, the accused examined himself as DW1. One witness was also examined as DW2. The witness examined on the side of the accused could not prove the defence case that amount was in fact borrowed by the brother of the accused, or that it was only 50, 000/ - or that the entire debt stands discharged. In such a situation, the trial court believed the evidence of the complainant and found the revision petitioner guilty. On conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months, and was also directed to pay a compensation of 2, 25, 000/ - to the complainant under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C.

(3.) ON hearing the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and on a perusal of the case records, I find no reason or ground to admit the revision to files. The revision can be dismissed in limine, however granting some time to the revision petitioner to make payment of the compensation as requested by the learned counsel.