LAWS(P&H)-2018-8-157

SARABJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

Decided On August 14, 2018
SARABJIT SINGH Appellant
V/S
State of Punjab and Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-accused has filed the present revision petition against the judgment dated 20.12.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala whereby his appeal filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.05.2017 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nabha in Complaint Case No.32 dated 04.02.2013 titled as Punjab National Bank, Nabha Versus M/s Ramgarhia Agri. Engg. Works, Nabha, was dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stated, the respondent No.2-complainant Punjab National Bank, Nabha had filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, the Act) against the petitioner-accused. As per the complaint, on 012009, the petitioner had availed a cash credit limit facility to the tune of Rs. 10 lakh from the bank for the purpose of manufacturing combines. This limit was enhanced on 007.2010 from Rs. 10 lakh to Rs. 17 lakh. The petitioner executed necessary documents in favour of the complainant-bank and agreed to pay interest as per the bank norms. In discharge of his legal liability, the petitioner issued a cheque bearing No.501179 dated 03.01.2013 for a sum of Rs. 17,90,393/- from his account No.1914 to be drawn on the Bank of Baroda, Nabha. However, on presentation of the cheque by the complainant-bank, the cheque was dishonoured vide memo dated 05.01.2013 with the endorsement "Funds Insufficient". After dishonouring of the cheque, the complainant-bank issued a legal notice to the petitioner-accused on 09.01.2013 and the same was sent by way of registered post on 10.01.2013. The notice was duly served, but still the petitioner failed to make the payment. Hence, the complaint.

(3.) Vide order dated 20.02013 passed by learned Magistrate, the petitioner-accused was summoned to face trial for the offence under Section 138 of the Act. The accused appeared in the Court and notice of accusation under Section 138 of the Act was served upon him to which he did not plead guilty and claimed trial.