BHAVITABEN M VYAS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned A.P.P. Mr.Archana Raval waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent no.1-State while Mr.Harin Raval for Mr.Samir Bundela waives service on behalf of the respondent no.2.

(2.) This Criminal Revision Application filed under Section 397 read with section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the applicants nos.1 and 2 -original accused challenging the judgment and order dated 12th January 2007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class , Junagadh in Criminal Case no.108 of 2006 as also the judgment and order dated 25th May, 2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge & Fast Track Court Judge, Junagadh, in Criminal Appeal no.8 of 2007 confirming the same. By the impugned judgment dated 12-1-2007, the learned Magistrate has convicted the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the accused no.1 was sentenced to suffer S.I for one year and fine of Rs.5000/-while the accused no.2 was only imposed sentence of fine of Rs.5000/-.

(3.) Briefly stated, the facts leading to the filing of the present Revision Application are that the respondent no.2 lodged a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Junagadh which was registered as Criminal Case no.108 of 2006. The respondent no.2 in the said complaint alleged that the applicants had issued a cheque no.073520 dated 4th November, 2005 drawn on Bank of Baroda, Junagadh, for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards settlement of debt to the complainant which on presentation to the bank was dishonoured and returned with the endorsement Sinsufficient funds . It is further alleged in the complaint that despite service of notice dated 9th November, 2005 to the applicants, the applicants have neither replied to notice nor paid up the amount of debt. The learned Magistrate issued process but the applicants did not plead guilty, and hence trial commenced. The complainant has produced documentary evidence to prove his case as also examined himself. The further statement of the applicants-accused as required under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code was also recorded wherein they denied the evidence of the prosecution and disputed the writings on the cheque in question. After hearing the learned Counsel for both the parties and taking into consideration the materials placed before him, the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at the end of the trial, passed the judgment and order dated 12-1-2007 in Criminal Case no.108 of 2006 which was confirmed in appeal by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and Fast Track Court Judge, Junagadh, vide judgment and order dated 25th May, 2007 in Criminal Appeal no.8 of 2007, giving rise to the present Criminal Revision Application.