SRI PINAKI DASGUPTA, SON OF LATE JAGASDISH DASGUPTA, C/O MEERAJ FASHION, AZAHAR MARKET, S.S. ROAD, FANCY BAZAR, P.O. Vs. SHRI DEBASISH SARKAR, SON OF DULAL SARKAR, C/O

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 30.06.2006 passed by the learned Ad-hoc Addl. Session Judge No. 2, Kamrup, Guwahati in Crl. A. No. 41/2005 affirming the judgment and order dated 11.04.2005 passed by the learned SDJM(S), No.1, Kamrup, Guwahati in C. R. No. 18c/2004 convicting the petitioner u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short N. I. Act) and sentencing him to pay fine of Rs. 2000.00 in default to suffer imprisonment for 6 months and directing him to pay the cheque amount of Rs. 2,12,808.00 to the respondent complainant as compensation.

(2.) In order appreciate the merit of this revision, essential factual details as per the version of the complainant respondent is that he is a business man by profession and carrying on the business under the name and style of M/S Prince Watch Company, located at Fancy Bazar, Guwahati. The accused petitioner was a customer of the complainant and was liable to pay the amount of Rs. 2,12,808.00 to the complainant. The accused petitioner by way of repayment issued 3 A/C payee cheques bearing No. 814130 dated 12.10.2003 for Rs. 50,000.00 No 814132 dated 13.10.2003 for Rs.29,604.00 and No. 814134 dated 20.11.2003 for Rs. 1,33,204.00 in favour of the complainant drawn at the Punjab and National Bank, Mahabir Market SRCB Road, Guwahati. The complainant presented the cheque to his banker Central Bank of India but those were dishonoured due to insufficiency of fund in the account of the accused petitioner. The complainant respondent, therefore, issued legal notice on 8.12.2003 to the accused petitioner and in response to the notice, the accused petitioner replied to the complainant admitting his liability and expressed his willingness to pay the same in instalments but ultimately failed to do so which compelled the complainant to filed the complaint.

(3.) It is an admitted fact that the complainant respondent is the owner of M/S Prince Watch Company situated at Fancy Bazar and it is also admitted that the accused petitioner had a business relationship with him and he used to purchase materials from his shop from time to time. It is also not in dispute that the accused petitioner issued 3 A/C payee cheques in favour of the complainant respondent and those were dishonoured.