TARO DEVI Vs. STATE BANK OF PATIALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to the non bailable warrants issued by this Court, the petitioner has been produced in the custody of ASI Ramesh Chand I/C PP Tihra, P. S. Dharampur and L/C Neelam Kaur No. 813, P. S. Sarkaghat.

(2.) Looking to the nature of order, I propose to pass, it is not at all necessary to delve into the facts in detail. Suffice it to stated that the complainant/respondent instituted a complaint under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. ''Act'') against the petitioner on the allegations that petitioner approached respondent bank for grant of term loan in the sum of Rs.8,10,000.00 for the purchase of Tipper Truck. The loan was sanctioned and the entire amount was disbursed. The accused had agreed to re-pay the term loan at the rate of interest of 14% per annum with monthly rests and undertook to return the loan with 60 monthly installments of Rs.20,250.00 beginning from January, 2009 and the accused and her husband had defaulted the payment to the tune of Rs.1,67,000.00 on 30/11/2010 and further issued a cheque No. 956931, dtd. 1/12/2010 of the defaulted amount from their Saving Account, which was dishonoured for insufficient funds and thereafter the Bank issued a legal notice on 2/12/2010 to the petitioner/accused and despite legal notice the petitioner/accused failed to make the payment of cheque amount, hence, the complaint was filed in the Court. The complaint was decided in favour of respondent-Bank by the learned trial Magistrate and the petitioner/accused was sentenced to simple imprisonment for twelve months and directed to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000.00 to the complainant. In default of payment of compensation, the petitioner/accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

(3.) Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Magistrate on 23/1/2015/29/1/2015, though the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur, H.P., however, the same came to be dismissed vide judgment dtd. 25/5/2018, constraining the petitioner to file the instant revision petition.