ANANDAM K. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the courts below under Section 138 of the N.I.Act.

(2.) Heard.

(3.) The learned counsel for the revision petitioner has submitted that eventhough the revision petitioner had a contention that the amount covered by Ext. P5 cheque was not due to the complainant from the revision petitioner, the courts below did not consider the said aspect and in the said circumstances, the conviction and sentence cannot be sustained.