R PANCHABAKESAN Vs. C VIJAYARAGHAVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The convicted sole accused is the revision petitioner herein. He has filed this Criminal Revision Case to set aside the judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Pattukottai in Crl.A.No.18 of 2010, by judgment dated 09.07.2010, confirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Orathanadu in C.C.No.429 of 2008, by judgment dated 19.01.2010.

(2.) The respondent / private complainant has filed a private complaint before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Orathanadu, Thanjavur District in S.T.C.No.429 of 2008 against the revision petitioner / accused, alleging that the petitioner / accused has borrowed a sum of Rs.1,25,000.00 (Rupees One Lakh and Twenty Five Thousand Only) from the respondent / complainant, promising to repay the loan within six months, but instead of repayment, he issued the cheque Ex.P.1, which was dishonored on presentation for collection and hence, the respondent / private complainant has issued statutory notice on 28.07.2008 and on receipt of which, the accused has sent a reply notice with false allegations and the respondent has filed this complaint.

(3.) The suggestive case that was put forwarded by the revision petitioner herein before the Court of trial is that he never borrowed any amount much less the sum of Rs.1,25,000.00 from the complainant. He issued Ex.P.1 signed in a blank form along with 2 other cheques and 2 promissory notes and 6 documents of title of himself to the respondent / private complainant to be utilized by him as securities for raising substantial amount by way of loan for going abroad for his avocation and thus, he had handed over the three cheques including Ex.P.1, two promissory notes and six documents of title only by way of security to be used by the respondent / private complainant and that no consideration is passed under Ex.P.1 as alleged by the respondent / complainant. To substantiate his said defence, the petitioner / accused has also contended that on 10.01.2008 the alleged date of borrowing by him he had been only at Kuzhithurai, wherefrom he left for Thanjavur only on the next day. The appellant / accused had produced the number of ExsD.1 to D.14 to establish that he was frequenting Kulithurai invariably every month and particularly by way of Ex.D.4 he has sought to establish that he was at Kulithurai on 10.01.2008 and had left for Thanjavur only on that night.