O. ASHOKAN Vs. NIDHESHKUMAR & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the courts below under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, (for short "the NI Act").

(2.) Heard.

(3.) The learned counsel for the revision petitioner has submitted that the cheque in question was stolen from the toddy shop of the revision petitioner and hence the conviction and sentence cannot be sustained. Exts.D2 and D3 are the complaints filed by the revision petitioner in connection with the strike in front of the toddy shop of the revision petitioner. Exts.D2 and D3 do not disclose anything to the effect that any damage was caused either to the toddy shop or the materials in the toddy shop. Exts.D2 and D3 would clearly show that there was a strike in front of the toddy shop of the revision petitioner and in the said strike, one worker of the toddy shop along with some others prevented the persons from entering into the toddy shop.