KULDEEP MEHTA Vs. MAHESH DOORDARSHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant criminal revision petition filed under S.397 read with S.401 CrPC, lays challenge to judgment dated 9.7.2014 passed by learned Sessions Judge (Forests) Shimla in Cr. Appeal RBT No. 100-S/10 of 2013/11, affirming judgment/order of conviction and sentence dated 15.1.2011 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No.3, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh in Cr. Case No. 2087-3 of 2010/08, whereby learned Court below, while holding petitioner-accused (hereinafter, 'accused') guilty of having committed offence punishable under Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? . S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter, 'Act'), convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment . for a period of six months and to pay compensation of Rs.2.75 Lakh.

(2.) Precisely, the facts as emerge from the record are that the respondent-complainant (hereinafter, 'complainant') instituted a complaint under S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter, 'Act') against the petitioner-accused (hereinafter, 'accused') in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No. 3, Shimla alleging therein that the accused had purchased certain goods on credit basis from the complainant and with a view to discharge his liability, he issued cheque bearing No. 878066 dated 6.8.2008 amounting to Rs. 2,15,000/-, however, the fact remains that on presentation, aforesaid cheque was dishonoured on account of insufficient funds in the account of accused. Since despite having received legal notice, accused failed to pay the amount, complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings under S.138 of the Act in the competent Court of law.

(3.) Learned trial Court, in the totality of evidence led on record by respective parties, held accused guilty of having committed offence punishable under S.138 of the Act and sentenced him as per description given herein above. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment of conviction and sentence, accused preferred an appeal before . learned Sessions Judge (Forests), Shimla, which was dismissed vide judgment dated 9.7.2014. In the aforesaid background, accused has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for his acquittal after setting aside impugned judgments/order of conviction and sentence passed by learned Courts below.