D ATCHYUTHA REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is the sole accused in C.C. No. 34 of 2007 on the file of the VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad preferred this revision assailing the judgment of the I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in Criminal Appeal No. 179 of 2010. The petitioner was convicted by the trial Court for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC, for short) and was sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- with appropriate order of default sentence. The learned I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad dismissed the Criminal Appeal. The case of the second respondent/de facto complainant is that the petitioner issued Ex. P.2 cheque dated 12.05.2003 with a view to cheat the second respondent and that thus the petitioner committed cheating punishable u/s. 420 IPC.

(2.) The facts are not in dispute. The petitioner-accused and the second respondent-de facto complainant knew each other since quite some time. It is the case of the second respondent that the accused borrowed Rs. 5,00,000/- from the second respondent in July, 2002 on the foot of a pronote, certified copy of which is Ex. P.7. It is the further case of the second respondent that the petitioner borrowed Rs. 5,00,000/- from the second respondent in the presence of two witnesses, who attested the pronote.

(3.) In May, 2003, it would appear that the second respondent demanded for return of the money borrowed by the petitioner. The petitioner, consequently, issued a cheque on 12.05.2003, the certified copy of which is Ex. P.2. When the second respondent presented the same for encashment in his bank on 10.06.2003, the cheque was returned on 11.06.2003 under Ex. P.3-endorsement that the account was closed. Hence, the case that the petitioner cheated the second respondent.