K BALU Vs. R RAMESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The criminal revision arises out of the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 06.12.2007, in C.A.No.4/2007, passed by the learned VI Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai, whereby the accused was convicted for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- to the com-plainant within three months, in default, to un-dergo three months' simple imprisonment, con-firming the judgment of conviction and compen-sation, but modifying the sentence (i.e.) reduc-ing the sentence from two years into six months, dated 11.12.2006 in C.C.No.2446/2001 passed by the learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai-15.

(2.) The case of the respondent/complainant is that the petitioner/accused, who is the propri-etor of M/S.K.B.Films, approached the respon-dent/complainant and borrowed a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- for the purpose of producing Tamil film and executed the promissory notes under Ex.Pl series. Towards the discharge of said liability, the accused issued Exs.P2 and P3 two cheques bearing Nos.178559 and 178558, dated 11.09.2000 and 12.09.2000, for Rs. 10,00,000/- each. When the cheques were presented in the Bank for encashment, they re-turned on 20.02.2001 as "Funds insufficient" and the return memo was marked as Fx.P4. Thereafter, the complainant issued a statutory notice Ex.P6 to the accused on 05.03.2001 and received the same by the accused on 09.03.2001 as per Ex.PS acknowledgement card. The ac-cused neither sent any reply to the notice nor repaid the amount. Hence, the respondent/com-plainant constrained to file a complaint against the petitioner/accused under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) The trial Court, after following the procedure and examining the witnesses P.W.I and D.W.I and perused the documentary evidence under Exs.Pl to P9, convicted the accused un-der Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to undergo simple impris-onment for two years and to pay a compensa-tion of Rs.20,00,000/- to the complainant un-der Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. within three months, in default in payment, to undergo simple im-prisonment for three months, against which, the accused preferred an appeal in C.A.No.4/2007. The learned VI Additional Sessions Judge, after hearing the arguments of both sides counsel, confirmed the conviction and compensation and modified the sentence from two years into six months simple imprisonment, against which, the accused has come forward with the present re-vision.