AJAY KUMAR Vs. DEV RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant criminal revision petition filed under Ss. 397 and 401 CrPC, lays challenge to judgment dtd. 11/1/2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh in Cr. Appeal No. 27-K/X/2019, affirming judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 25/6/2019 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No,2 Kangra, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh in Cr. Complaint No. 88-III/2016, whereby learned trial Court, while holding petitioner-accused (hereinafter, 'accused') guilty of having committed offence punishable under S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter, 'Act') convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and pay compensation to the tune of Rs.1.30 Lakh to the respondent-complainant (hereinafter, 'complainant')

(2.) Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record, are that complainant, instituted complaint under S. 138 of the Act before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2 Kangra, Himachal Pradesh alleging therein that he lent Rs.1.00 Lakh to the accused on his request. Though, the aforesaid amount was to be repaid within one year but since the accused failed to make payment of the amount, he issued a cheque amounting to Rs.1.00 Lakh drawn upon Punjab National Bank, Sidhpur from his account, in favour of the complainant. However, the fact remains that the said cheque on its presentation was dishonoured on account of 'insufficient funds' in the account of the accused. Since, despite having received legal notice served by the complainant, petitioner failed to make good the payment within time stipulated in the legal notice, he (complainant) was compelled to institute proceedings under S. 138 of the Act against the accused in the competent Court of law, which on the basis of evidence adduced on record by respective parties, held the accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under S.138 of the Act and accordingly convicted and sentenced him as per description given above.

(3.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with judgment of conviction and order of sentence, accused preferred an appeal before learned Sessions Judge Kangra at Dharamshala but the same was dismissed vide judgment dtd. 11/1/2022. In the aforesaid background, accused has approached this court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for his acquittal after setting aside judgments of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned Courts below.