TULA RAM Vs. PREM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant criminal revision petition filed under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 of the Cr. P. C., is directed against the judgment dated 02.06.2015, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Shimla, District Shimla, HP, in Criminal Appeal No. RBT-230-S/10 of 2014, affirming the judgment and order of conviction dated 21.7.2014/27.10.2014, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No, (2), Shimla, H. P., in Case No. 966-3 of 2014/11, whereby the accused-petitioner ('the accused' for short) has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short 'the Act') and to pay compensation of Rs. 75,000.00 to the complainant.

(2.) Briefly stated facts as emerge from the record are that the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) filed a complaint under Sec. 138 of the Act, in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. (2), Shimla, H. P., against the present petitioner stating therein that since parties (the accused and the complainant) were known to each other, the accused requested the complainant to arrange Rs. 60,000.00 for his personal and business requirement. Accordingly, the complainant on the aforesaid request advanced him an amount of Rs. 60,000.00 in Sept., 2010. The accused with a view to discharge his liability issued a post dated cheque bearing No. 318635 dated 10.1.2011, (Ext. CW1/A) amounting to Rs. 60,000.00, of his account maintained in Punjab National Bank, Kunihar. However, fact remains that on presentation, cheque in question was dishonoured vide memo dated 17.1.2011 (Ext. CW1/B) for want of sufficient funds in the account of the accused.

(3.) After receipt of the aforesaid memo, the complainant got legal notice (Ext. CW1/C) issued on 22.1.2011 to the accused through registered post as well as UPC on 24.1.2011 calling upon him to make the payment good but since no payment was made within the stipulated period, he was compelled to initiate proceedings under Sec. 138 of the Act, Learned Courts below on the basis of material adduced on record by the respective parties, held the accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Act and accordingly convicted and sentenced him as per the description already given above.