SUNIL KUMAR Vs. SURINDER GARG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision is directed against the judgment dt. 22/2/2025, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (1), Shimla, H.P. (learned Appellate Court) vide which the judgment of conviction passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.4, Shimla (learned Trial Court) and order of sentence dt. 4/11/2023 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Shimla were upheld. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the complainant filed a complaint against the accused before the learned Trial Court for the commission of an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short, "NI Act'). It was asserted that the accused had borrowed Rs.12,00,000.00 from the complainant between 10/5/2014 to 22/8/2014. He promised to repay the amount within one year and issued two cheques - one for Rs.5,00,000.00 and another for Rs.7,00,000.00 drawn on the Bank of Baroda, Kasumpti, to repay the amount. The complainant presented the cheque f Rs.7,00,000.00 for encashment, but the bank dishonoured it with an endorsement 'funds insufficient'. The complainant sent the legal notice to the accused, which was duly served upon him. The accused failed to repay the money. Hence, a complaint was filed against the accused for taking action as per the law.

(3.) The learned Trial Court found sufficient reasons to summon the accused. When the accused appeared, a notice of accusation was put to him for the commission of an offence punishable under Sec. 138 read with Sec. 142 of the NI Act, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.