DARSHAN LAL Vs. AMIT GUPTA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision has been filed by the petitioner-accused Darshan Lal against judgement dated 14.01.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra affirming the judgment of conviction dated 08.08.2008 and order of sentence dated 11.08.2008 of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kurukshetra vide which the petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 1 year. He was also directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,75,000/- to the complainant within a period of three months.

(2.) The facts of the case as made out from the trial court file are that according to the complainant-respondent No. 1, he had advanced some loan to the accused-petitioner. In discharge of the said liability, the accused-petitioner had issued a cheque No. 491543 dated 06.10.2004 amounting Rs. 2,75,000/- drawn on State Bank of India, Ladwa. The said cheque, when presented, was dishonoured on the same day with endorsement "Exceed Arrangements". Thereafter, the petitioner had issued a legal notice dated 07.10.2004. Despite issuing legal notice, cheque amount was not paid, hence, the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was filed before the trial Court. The petitioner before the lower Court in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr. P.C. has taken the stand that he had not issued the cheque rather a cheque book was handed over to the Rajinder Pal Gupta, uncle of the complainant, as a security which was having blank cheques bearing the signatures of accused-petitioner. He has made the entire payment of Rs. 40,000/- to the uncle of the complainant. When he demanded the documents, the uncle of the complainant stated that these have been lost. Rajinder Pal Gupta then filed a criminal complaint before the Illaqa Magistrate regarding Cheque No. 491547 dated 03.10.2002 amounting to sum of Rs. 4,10,000/- but the same was dismissed for want of prosecution. The revision against the said order was dismissed vide order dated 05.10.2004. It was further stated that the cheque No. 491543 dated 06.10.2004 was used by the complainant-respondent No. 1 to file a false complaint.

(3.) Both the Courts below held that the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not rebutted. It was held that since, legal liability is proved, therefore, the conviction was accordingly awarded.