A SAKTHIVEL Vs. K R NAVANEETHA KRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE criminal revisions arise out of the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 19.01.2006, in C.A.Nos.399 to 402 of 2004, 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.3,50,000/-, Rs.2,00,000/-, Rs.2,50,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/- (in all the four cases) to the respondent/complainant within three months, in default, to undergo three months' simple imprisonment, confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 31.05.2004 in C.C.Nos.650 of 2000 and 4384, 4386 and 5635 of 1999 passed by the learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case in Crl.R.C.No.93 of 2006: THE petitioner/accused borrowed money from the respondent/complainant and in respect of the same, he issued Exs.P1 to P3 promissory notes and issued Exs.P4 to P6 three cheques bearing Nos.079329, 079330 and 079331 for Rs.1,00,000/-, Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.1,50,000/-, dated 23.09.1998, 24.09.1998 and 25.09.1998 respectively, for discharging legally enforceable debt. When the cheques were presented in the Bank for encashment under Exs.P7 to P9 challans, they returned as "insufficient funds" and the return memo was marked as Ex.P10 and debit advice was marked as Ex.P11. After that, the respondent/complainant herein has issued a statutory notice to the petitioner/accused under Ex.P12 and an acknowledgment card was marked as Ex.P13. After receipt of the said notice, the petitioner/accused neither repaid the amount nor sent any reply. Hence, the respondent/complainant preferred a complaint against the petitioner/accused under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) THE brief facts of the case in Crl.R.C.No.96 of 2006: THE petitioner/accused borrowed money from the respondent/complainant and in respect of the same, he issued Exs.P1 and P2 promissory notes and issued Exs.P3 and P4 two cheques bearing Nos.079327 and 079328 for Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.1,00,000/-, dated 21.09.1998 and 22.09.1998 respectively, for discharging legally enforceable debt. When the cheques were presented in the Bank for encashment under Exs.P5 and P6 challans, they returned as "insufficient funds" and the return memo was marked as Ex.P7 and debit advice was marked as Ex.P8. After that, the respondent/complainant herein has issued a statutory notice to the petitioner/accused under Ex.P9, but the cover was returned and the same was marked as Ex.P10. Since the petitioner/accused has not repaid the cheque amounts, the respondent/complainant preferred a complaint against him under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.