K VEERAIAH Vs. GANESH CREDITS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner / appellant / accused has preferred the present revision in Crl.R.C.No.208 of 2010 against the judgment made in C.A.No.66 of 2009, on the file of IV Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai, confirming the conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.200 of 2007, on the file of XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.

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

(3.) P .W.1, in his proof affidavit had deposed that he is the Proprietor of the complainant concern, viz., M/s.Ganesh Credits and that he is carrying on the business of lending loans for two wheelers and four wheelers on the security of R.C.Book. He deposed that one Paul Vincent along with K.V.Varaprasad, son of the accused herein and one Sasikumar, an employee under Paul Vincent approached him and requested him to lend Rs.2,00,000.00 as H.P.loan for Ford Icon Car No.TN-10C-1408, owned by Paul Vincent, on the security of its R.C.Book. He deposed that he lent a sum of Rs.2,00,000.00 to Paul Vincent on 25.01.2002, after receiving the R.C.book, and that the said Varaprasad and Sasikumar stood as security for the due repayment of the said loan. During February 2002, when the said R.C.book was sent to the R.T.O. authorities for endorsement of the hire purchase favouring his concern, it was found that the said R.C.book was not original, but a fabricated and forged one. P.W.1 deposed that he had tried to contact Paul Vincent, but he had vacated his house and his whereabouts were not known. When he was about to lodge a police complaint, K.V.Varaprasad and Sasikumar admitted that they had conspired together with Paul Vincent to forge and fabricate the said R.C.book for the purpose of using the same to obtain loan from him and to cheat him. They also pleaded not to lodge any police complaint and they promised that they would settle the loan amount immediately. K.V.Varaprasad acknowledged his liability through his letter dated 02.03.2002 to him and promised to settle the loan. The said letter was marked as Ex.P1. He also admitted his involvement in the forgery and fabrication of the said R.C.book through his letter dated 22.04.2002. The said letter dated 22.04.2002 is Ex.P2. The accused herein, taking the responsibility of repayment of loan, stood guarantee through his letter dated 25.04.2002, which is marked as Ex.P3.The accused, thereafter, in order to discharge the said loan issued three cheques bearing Nos.826413, 826414 and 826415 dated 02.11.2002, 02.01.2003 and 02.03.2003, all drawn on Indian Overseas Bank, Perambur Branch, Chennai-11, each for a value of Rs.60,000.00. The cheque bearing No.826415, dated 02.03.2003, concerned in this case was marked as Ex.P4. When the said cheque was presented for collection on 09.04.2003 through the complainant's bankers, viz., Union Bank, Triplicane Branch, the said cheque was returned unpaid with an endorsement of "payment stopped by drawer" (Ex.P5). P.W.1 deposed that he was intimated about return of cheque through his bank's debit advice dated 11.04.2003, which is marked as Ex.P6. He issued a legal notice dated 09.05.2003 by registered post (Ex.P7). The postal receipt dated 09.05.2003 is Ex.P8. The accused duly acknowledged the receipt of notice on 11.05.2003 as per acknowledgment card (Ex.P9).