LOKESH KUMAR SINGH Vs. PUSHPENDRA KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged the judgment dated 7.1.2008, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sawai Madhopur, whereby the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 the Act' for short) and has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment of six months, and has been imposed with a fine of Rs.60,000/-, and has been directed to further suffer one and a half month of simple imprisonment in default thereof. THE petitioner is also aggrieved by the judgment dated 23.4.2011, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur, whereby the learned Judge has upheld the judgment dated 7.1.2008.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that on 28.2.2000, the complainant respondent No.1, Pushpendra Kumar Jain, filed a complaint only against Lok Vikas Finance Corporation Limited, through Manging Director, Lokesh Kumar Singh. THE complainant did not array the petitioner as an accused. It was alleged in the complaint that the cheque, issued for payment of the deposits, made in recurring deposit account of the company, has bounced. Despite the service of the statutory notice, the payment has not been made. On 15.2.2001, the learned trial court took cognizance of the offence under Section 138 of the Act against the Corporation. No cognizance was taken against the petitioner. THE petitioner, on behalf of the company, denied the allegation and prayed for trial. However, vide judgment dated 7.1.2008, the trial court held the petitioner guilty for the offence under section 138 of the Act, and convicted and sentenced him, as mentioned above. THE learned trial court did not convict the Corporation. THE petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate court. Vide judgment dated 23.4.2011, the appellate court partly confirmed the judgment dated 7.1.2008. However, as the petitioner failed to appear before the appellate court due to illness, still the appellate court directed that a case against the petitioner be registered for offence under section 229-A IPC. Hence, the present revision petition.

(3.) SECTION 141 of the Act is as under:-