K.STELLAPREMA Vs. V.HEMALATA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner / appellant / accused has preferred the present revision in Crl.R.C.No.327 of 2012 against the judgment made in C.A.No.108 of 2007, on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai, confirming the conviction made in CC.No.7325 of 2004, on the file of XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai.

(2.) THE respondent / complainant's case is as follows:-

(3.) P .W.1, the complainant had adduced evidence which is corroborative of the statements made by her in the complainant. P.W.1 adduced evidence that the accused after receiving the lawyer's notice sent by her had given a letter of undertaking to her school management assuring that she would pay the cheque amount promptly and that the letter of undertaking had been marked as Ex.P5 and the letter given by the accused to her acknowledging the liability has been marked as Ex.P6. In support of her evidence, she had marked the documents listed as Exs.P1 to P9.