T.RAJAMUTHU Vs. S.SHAHUL HAMEED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused in S.T.C.No.183 of 2019 filed this revision petition challenging the conviction passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manapprai in S.T.C.No.183 of 2019 confirmed by the Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Tiruchirappalli ,in Crl.A.No.14 of 2021.

(2.) The respondent initiated the proceedings against the petitioner under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act for the alleged dishonour of cheque issued by him dtd. 16/4/2019. According to the respondent, the petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs.2,00,000.00 (Rupees Two Lakhs) from him on 10/1/2019 for his family expenditure. To discharge the same on 16/4/2019, he gave a cheque drawn on the Kanara Bank bearing No.631972 for the value of Rs.2,00,000.00. The respondent presented the cheque in his bank and the same was returned for insufficiency of fund. Therefore, he issued the statutory notice under the Negotiable Instruments Act. The same was received by the petitioner. But he did not send any reply. Thereafter, the respondent filed the complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manapparai under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The same was taken on file by the leaned Judicial Magistrate, in S.T.C.No.183 of 2019. After taking the cognizance, the trial Court issued summons to the petitioner. The petitioner after appearing before the Court, denied all the allegations and pleaded not guilty and hence trial was commenced.

(3.) The respondent, in order to prove his case produced P.W.1 and P.W.2 and Ex.B1 to B5. On the side of the petitioner, D.W.1 was examined. The learned trial judge after considering the evidence on the side of the respondent and the petitioner and also the documents adduced by the respondent, convicted the petitioner under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, and sentenced him to undergo 12 (Twelve) months Simple Imprisonment with a compensation of Rs.2,00,000.00 in default, to undergo 2 (Two) weeks simple imprisonment. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sessions Mahila Court, Tiruchirappalli, in C.A.No.14 of 2021. The same was also confirmed by the Appellate Judge. Aggrieved over the same, he filed the present revision case.