C RAMANATHAN PETITIONER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both the parties.

(2.) THE above revision is directed against the order dated 28.8.94 in C.A.No.90 of 1994 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Madurai, confirming the order of conviction and sentence dated 9.6.94 in C.C.No.1023 of 1994 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, convicting the petitioner under Section 417, I.P.C and sentencing him for six months rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,000 in default of which, one month rigorous imprisonment in addition.

(3.) IN this connection, it is relevant to refer the decision in Thiruganam v. G. Chandrasekaran, 1989 L.W. (Crl.) 370, wherein, it is held as follows: "IN this case, the failure of the petitioner to make funds available in the bank for the post-dated cheques to be honoured, can, by no stretch of imagination, be construed as a dishonest intention on his part to deceive the respondent and if at all, it will amount to a failure of the promises to pay on a future date to give rise to a civil action. As such, the prosecution launched by the respondent before the Court below is liable to be quashed."