ADLINE PANCY VIJAYAN Vs. NAVAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision Petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.97/2010 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kalpetta. She assails the judgment in Crl.A.No.24/2016 of Sessions Court, Kalpetta by which the Sessions Court confirmed the conviction and sentence against her in C.C.No.97/2010 for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'NI Act').

(2.) The parties shall be referred to as complainant and accused.

(3.) The case of the complainant in brief is that accused borrowed a sum of Rs.5.00 lakhs from him in the 1 st week of November 2009, agreeing to repay the same within three months. When demanded back the amount, accused issued Ext.P1 cheque for Rs.5.00 lakhs drawn on State Bank of India, Kainatty Branch. Upon presentation of Ext.P1 cheque, it was returned dishonoured due to 'insufficient funds' and also stating the reason 'drawers signature incomplete'. In spite of receipt of notice dtd. 27/3/2010, accused failed to pay the amount covered by the cheque. Accused thereby committed the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of N.I Act.