APAN KUMAR DAS Vs. DILIP KUMAR ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant revision petition is filed against the judgment dated 18.12.2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Udaipur in Criminal Appeal No. 9(2) of 2009 where under the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal upholding the judgment dated 28.04.2009 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, South Tripura, Udaipur in C.R.173 of 2007 wherein the accused petitioner was found guilty and was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 5,25,000/ - out of which Rs. 4,90,000/ - will be paid to the complainant respondent and the rest amount of Rs. 35,000/ - will be deposited in the treasury by challan, as being consigned to the government exchequer and in default of payment of fine, the accused petitioner shall suffer simple imprisonment for six months.

(2.) HEARD Mr. H. Laskar, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioner as well as Mr. A. Bhowmik, learned counsel appearing for the complainant respondent. The case of the respondent, in short, is that the accused petitioner Sri Apan kumar Das was well acquainted with the complainant respondent since long back and he had monetary transaction with the complainant respondent. The accused petitioner, in order to discharge his debts and liabilities towards the complainant respondent issued a cheque bearing No. CD/A 293630 dated 15.12.2006 for an amount of Rs. 5 lakh drawn on Tripura State Cooperative Bank Limited, Hrishyamukh Branch, Belonia, in favour of the respondent complainant. On presentation, the said cheque was returned with an endorsement "full cover not received". After complying with all necessary requirements, the respondent complainant lodged a complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, South Tripura, Udaipur under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

(3.) MR . Laskar, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioner, while urging for setting aside the judgment of the learned appellate Court as well as the learned trial Court would contend that even after offence is proved under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the learned trial Court has no power to pass an order to pay a fine more than the amount mentioned in the cheque, which was dishonoured. He further submits that by way of sentencing the accused petitioner to pay a fine of Rs. 5,25,000/ -, is nothing but recovery of money.