PRATAP CHANDRA MOHANTY Vs. BATA KRISHNA SAHOO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner by filing this revision has called in question, the judgment dated 21.03.2013 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rourkela in Criminal Appeal No. 52 of 2012.

(2.) The case of the complainant is that the accused was known to him and they were having friendly relationship. In view of that the complainant as per the request of the accused had made investment in the chemical business of the accused with an assurance that towards that investment, he would be paid with some more amount from out of the profit. So on 3.12.2009, the accused issued a cheque bearing no. 162142 for a sum of Rs.11,50,000/- drawn on his account with Industrial Bank Ltd., Cuttack in favour of the complainant. The cheque having been placed for collection on 1.6.2010 through Sundargarh District Central Bank Ltd., Rourkela bounced back being dishonoured as the account on which it had been drawn stood closed by then.

(3.) The trial court upon scrutiny of the evidence of the complainant examined as C.W.1 and examining the documents admitted on his behalf vide Ext. 1 to 5 as also the evidence of the witness (D.W.1) examined in defence, has come to a conclusion that the accused had issued the cheque in favour of the complainant to discharge his debt and liability. So the complainant's case having been held to have been proved, the accused has been convicted for offence under section 138 of the N.I. Act and accordingly, he has been sentenced and directed to pay the compensation with the default stipulation as aforesaid.