GOVERDHAN SINGH Vs. ASHOK KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cr.MP(M) No.69 of 2018 1. Mr. Amar Dev Sharma, Advocate has filed Power of Attorney on behalf of the respondent.

(2.) Mr. Amar Dev Sharma, learned counsel representing the respondent, on the instructions, having been imparted to him by his client, Sh. Ashok Kumar, who is present in Court, stated that he has no objection in case the delay in maintaining the instant criminal revision petition is condoned. Consequently, in view of the averments contained in the application as well as statement having been made by learned counsel for the respondent, delay of 3 years six months and 29 days in Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? maintaining the present petition is condoned. Criminal Revision Petition be registered. Application stands disposed of. . Cr. Revision No.37 of 2018. Instant Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is directed against the judgment dated 13.06.2014, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-(II) Camp at Rohru, District Shimla H.P in Criminal Appeal No. RBT No. 2- S/10 of 2014/2012, affirming the judgment of conviction and sentence r dated 28.5.2012/29.5.2012, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Court No.1, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P. in Case No. 45/3 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 a period of six months and to pay a sum of Rs.80,000/-, as compensation to the complainant and in default of payment of compensation to further undergo simple imprisonment for 1 1/2 months . 2. Briefly stated facts, as emerged from the record are that the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the complainant), filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Court No.1, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., alleging therein that in the . year, 2010, accused had persuaded him to send apple boxes for sale in his shop at Rohru and on his request complainant sent 71 apple boxes of Royal variety for sale at Rohru and net sale consideration of 71 apple boxes comes to Rs. 67,200/-. In partial discharge of the said debt, accused issued a cheque bearing No. 098128, amounting to Rs. 45,000/- dated 12.12 2010 in favour of the complainant drawn at Punjab National Bank, Rohru, however fact remains that on presentation, cheque issued by the accused was dishonoured on account of "insufficient funds" in the account of the accused. Since, the accused failed to make the payment good despite opportunity having been afforded by the complainant by way of legal notice, he 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.