A VIJAYAKUMAR Vs. M ABDUL PARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Revision Case is filed against the judgment dated 25.11.2008 in Crl. A. No. 194 of 2008 on the file of the Additional District Court/Fast Track Court No. I, Erode, confirming the conviction and sentence passed by order dated 26.6.2008 in C.C. No. 310 of 2006 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. II, Erode, whereby the revision Petitioner/accused was convicted for the offence under Section 138 read with 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo two years' simple imprisonment.

(2.) The Respondent as complainant preferred a complaint under Section 138 read with 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, stating that on 25.12.2005, the revision Petitioner/accused borrowed a sum of Rs. 65,000/- from the complainant and to discharge the same, he issued cheque Ex.P-1 dated 27.1.2006 drawn on Indian Bank, Coimbatore in favour of the complainant, which was presented for collection through ICICI Bank, Erode, on 29.4.2006 and the same returned as dishonoured endorsing "Account Closed". The bank memo is marked as Ex.P-2. The debit advise is Ex.P-3. The statutory notice was issued under Ex.P-4 and the postal receipts are Exs.P-5 and P-6 and Exs.P-7 and P-8 are the returned postal covers, endorsing "refused"/"returned to sender as not claimed" and since the revision Petitioner/accused has not repaid the amount, he filed a private complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) The trial Court followed the procedures, and since the revision Petitioner/accused pleaded not guilty, examined P.W.1 and marked the documents Exs.P-1 to P-8 and considering the oral and documentary evidence, found the revision Petitioner/accused guilty of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and convicted and sentenced him as stated above, against which, the revision Petitioner/accused preferred appeal before the first appellate Court, which, after hearing the arguments on both sides, confirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court, against which, the present Crl. R.C. is preferred by the revision Petitioner/accused.