P NOOHUKHAN Vs. PAUL RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has been convicted for offence under section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- in default to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment by the Judicial strate No.II, Kuzhithurai in C.C.No.297 of 1998. Not being satisfied with the quantum of sentence, the complainant has filed this revision for compensation. Therefore, in the circumstances, it may not be necessary for me to advert to the facts in detail suffice to say that the petitioner herein filed a complaint against the respondent for an offence u/s 138 Negotiable Instruments Act on the averment that the respondent borrowed a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- as loan. By way of discharging the said loan, he issu ed a cheque dated 01.12.1998 to the said amount and when the same was presented in the bank, it was returned for want of sufficient funds. After observing all the formalities contemplated under the Act, prosecution was launched.

(2.) The accused denied having committed any offence. However, the court believed the evidence of the prosecution and convicted the accused as aforesaid.

(3.) This court sitting in revisionary jurisdiction is called upon to see only the legality, propriety and correctness of the order passed by the learned Magistrate. The punishment stipulated for an offence u/s 138 Negotiable Instruments Act is impriso t up to one year or twice the cheque amount or both and the Supreme Court has held that if the case has been tried by a I Class Magistrate, in view of section 29 Cr.P.C, a fine of Rs.5000/-. Therefore, in such cases, the maximum punishment contemplated i s one year rigorous imprisonment or Rs.5000/- fine or both. In the present case, the maximum punishment contemplated under the Act has been awarded. This revision can very well be dismissed on the ground that there is no illegality in the order passed by the court below.