NATHU RAM Vs. ATMA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant criminal revision petition filed under S.397 read with S.401 CrPC, lays challenge to judgment dated 19.9.2017 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh in Cr. Appeal No. 10 of 2017, affirming judgment of conviction/sentence dated 6.12.2016/7.12.2016 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Complaint No. 1524-I of 2013/424-I of 2015 (Old) 854-I of 2016(2013)(854-II of 2016(2013) (New), whereby court below, 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 three months and to pay compensation of Rs.2,60,000/- to the respondent, and, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month.

(2.) Precisely, the facts as emerge from the record are that the respondent-complainant (hereinafter, 'complainant') instituted a complaint under S.138 of the Act in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, alleging therein that in the month of April, 2013, accused borrowed a sum of Rs.2.00 Lakh from him and assured to return the same within a period of one month. After expiry of said period, accused, with a view to discharge his liability, issued cheques amounting to Rs.1.00 Lakh each, Exts. CW-1/B and CW-1/C in favour of the complainant, however the fact remains that aforesaid cheques were dishonoured on account of insufficient funds. Complainant, after receipt of memo from the Bank concerned, served accused with legal notice Ext. CW-1/F, calling upon him to make the payment good within stipulated period but since the accused failed to make the payment good within the period prescribed in the legal notice, complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings under S.138 of the Act in the competent Court of law.

(3.) Learned trial Court, on the basis of evidence adduced on record by the respective parties, held accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under S.138 of the Act and accordingly convicted and sentenced him as per description given herein above. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with aforesaid judgment/order of conviction recorded by learned trial Court, accused preferred an appeal in the court of learned first appellate Court, who vide judgment dated 19.9.2017, dismissed the appeal, as a consequence of which, judgment/order of conviction passed by learned trial Court came to be upheld. In the aforesaid background, accused has approached this Court in the instant proceedings seeking his acquittal after setting aside impugned judgments of conviction and sentence recorded by learned Courts below.