BARINDERPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in this application is for compounding the offence in view of the fact that the parties have amicably settled their dispute. Since the prayer made in this application has direct bearing on the main revision petition, the application is disposed of and let the main case, which is also listed today, be taken up.

(2.) The present revision petition has been filed against the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence, both dtd. 11/2/2019, passed by the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Talwandi Sabo in criminal complaint bearing CIS No. COMA/237/2015, titled as The Bathinda Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs. Barinderpal Singh, filed under Ss. 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'N. I. Act') read with Sec. 420 of IPC, whereby the petitioner was held guilty for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the N. I. Act and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.500.00. The petitioner has also laid challenge to the judgment dtd. 2/4/2025, passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda, whereby the appeal of the petitioner had been dismissed.

(3.) Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this revision petition are that the petitioner had obtained a house loan to the tune of Rs.20,00,000.00 from respondent No.2/complainant-Bank but failed to repay the same and committed default. In order to discharge his partial liability against the said loan, the petitioner issued a cheque for a sum of Rs.3,10,000.00 in favour of respondent No.2/complainant with an assurance that the same would be honoured on presentation but it dishonoured due to 'insufficient funds'. He was served with a legal notice dtd. 14/8/2015 but he failed to make payment within the time stipulated. Aggrieved from the same, the complainant filed the aforesaid complaint under Sec. 138 of N. I. Act, in which, the petitioner was held guilty and sentenced as mentioned above. His appeal too was dismissed by the learned appellate Court. Hence, the present revision petition.