SARITA RANA Vs. NEW NANDA JEWELLERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition filed under Sec. 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has challenged the judgment passed against him by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., in Criminal Case No. 104-III of 2016, titled as New India Jewellers vs. Smt. Sarita Rana, dtd. 21/7/2018, in terms whereof, the petitioner was convicted for commission of an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and also to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.3,50,000.00 (Rs. Three Lac Fifty Thousand only) to the complainant, as also the judgment passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions-III, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. in Criminal Appeal No. 30-P/X/2018, titled as Smt. Sarita Rana vs. New Nanda Jewellers, dtd. 28/2/2020, in terms whereof, the appeal preferred by the present petitioner against the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court was dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present petition are that the respondent/complainant filed a complaint under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner/accused inter alia on the grounds that the complainant was running the business of gold, silver and diamond jewellery, under the name and style of New Nanda Jewellers at Grand Plaza Palampur and the accused. on 11/2/2016, had purchased gold ornaments from the shop of the complainant worth Rs.2,76,287.00. To liquidate her legal and enforceable liability, she issued a cheque bearing No. 762705, dtd. 16/2/2016, in the sum of Rs. 2,76,287/-, drawn at State Bank of India (ADB), Palampur, in favour of the complainant. When the cheque was presented for its encashment, the same was dishonoured by the banker of the accused vide memo dtd. 5/3/2016, assigning the reason "not arranged for". Thereafter, a legal notice was issued by the complainant to the accused, calling upon the accused to make good the payment of the cheque amount, but as the complainant failed to do so, hence the complaint.

(3.) As already mentioned hereinabove, in terms of the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court, the petitioner has been convicted for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and she has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and has been further directed to pay compensation of Rs. 3,50,000/- to the complainant. This judgment passed by the learned Trial Court has been affirmed by the learned Appellate Court.