LAWS(HPH)-2017-8-119

JAIWANT NEGI Vs. AMIT CHAUHAN

Decided On August 01, 2017
Jaiwant Negi Appellant
V/S
Amit Chauhan Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is directed against the judgment dated 11.08.2014, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (I) Shimla (Camp at Rohru), District Shimla, H.P in Criminal Appeal No. 34-R/10 of 2012, affirming the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 29.08.2012, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No. II, Rohru, District Shimla H.P., in case No.93-3 of 2011, whereby learned trial Court, while holding petitioner-accused guilty of having committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay compensation of Rs. 1, 50,000/- to the respondent/complainant.

(2.) Briefly stated facts, as emerge from the record are that the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the complainant), filed complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), before the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No.II, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., alleging therein that the petitioner-accused( hereinafter referred to as the accused), who is a fruit and vegetable commission agent at Subzi Mandi, Rohru had purchased packed apple boxes from the shop of the complainant on different dates and in order to make part payment of the purchased apple boxes, issued cheque bearing No.96634,dated 13.09.2011 amounting to Rs. 1, 15,000/- drawn at State Bank of India, Rohru, District Shimla H.P. in favour of the complainant. However, fact remains that on presentation, aforesaid cheque was dishonoured on account of "insufficient funds", as a result of which, complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings under Section 138 of the Act, in the competent Court of law.

(3.) Subsequently, learned trial Court on the basis of the evidence adduced on record by the respective parties, came to the conclusion that the present petitioner-accused is guilty of having committed the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act and accordingly convicted and sentenced him as per the description already given supra.