TRIBHUBAN NARAYAN PANDEY Vs. RANJIT MONDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revisional application has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 28th November, 2003 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, 4th Fast Track Court, Bichar Bhawan, Calcutta in Criminal Appeal No.10/2001. The criminal appeal so preferred was against Complaint Case No.1025/99 (T.R. No.166/99) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1981, wherein by the impugned judgment the Appellate Court was pleased to set aside the order of conviction and sentence dated 31st January, 2001 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 5th Court, Calcutta.

(2.) The genesis of the case relate to a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (two lakh only) being taken by the accused from the complainant on 11th June, 1998 for starting a partnership business within 6 months from the date of receipt of the said money, which the accused failed and as a result, in discharge of the existing financial liability, he issued a cheque bearing No.410813 dated 28th January, 1999 for Rs. 2,00,000/- (two lakh only) drawn on Bank of India, Moulali Branch, Calcutta. The complainant deposited the said cheque with his banker, Union Bank of India, Ezra Street Branch, Calcutta for encashment, but the said cheque was returned being dishonoured with the remarks "funds insufficient". The cheque return memo dated 29th January, 1999 was received by the complainant along with the dishonoured cheque on 30th January, 1999. The complainant thereafter, through his advocate, sent a demand notice on 3rd February, 1999 by registered post with A/D. As the complainant did not receive any A/D Card, he sent a letter on 25th February, 1999 to the Director of Calcutta G.P.O. to ascertain the fate of the demand notice. In reply, the postal authority vide letter dated 22nd March, 1999 informed the learned Lawyer of the complainant that the demand notice was delivered to the accused on 4th February, 1999. The complainant did not receive the said amount of the dishonoured cheque and as such initiated the Complaint Case No. C/1025/99.

(3.) The learned Metropolitan Magistrate on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution and after examination of the accused under Section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code was pleased to hold the accused guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to suffer simple imprisonment for one year and to pay compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- (two lakh only) to the complainant.