BIGLAL ORAON Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment dtd. 11/3/2022 passed by the Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Criminal Appeal No.157 of 2019, whereby and whereunder the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 24/6/2019 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi in Compliant Case No.3111 of 2017 by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and was directed to pay fine by way of compensation a sum of Rs.8,00,000.00 to the complainant, namely, Debu Prasad Banerjee has been affirmed.

(2.) The brief facts leading to this criminal revision are that the complainant, namely, Debu Prasad Banerjee had moved the complaint before the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ranchi with these allegations that he and the accused both were well known to each other as a good friends. The daughter of accused Biglal Oraon was suffering from serious mental disease, therefore, he requested the complainant to arrange the amount of Rs.10.00 lacs for her proper treatment in a good hospital of India. On the request of the accused Biglal Oraon in good faith the complainant arranged the amount of Rs.7.60 lacs from his friends and relatives and gave the same to the accused. Further case of the complainant is that in order to discharge his liabilities of Rs.7.60 lacs, the accused has issued two cheques to the complainant. The first cheque bearing number 000142 dtd. 8/7/2017 for a sum of Rs.10,000.00and the second cheque bearing number 000172 dtd. 10/7/2017 and were drawn on Bank of India, Harmu Branch, Ranchi and same were issued in favour of the complainant. As per request of accused, the complainant deposited the said two cheques of Rs.7.60 lacs on 27/7/2017 of Bank of India, Harmu Branch, Ranchi with his Banker State Bank of India, P.B.B. Branch, P.P. Compound, Ranchi but both the cheques got dishonoured due to 'Insufficient Funds' on 28/7/2017. Thereafter the complainant immediately informed the accused on mobile phone about the dishonour of the said cheques but the accused told the complainant that he will not pay the said cheques amount and also threatened the complainant to face the dire consequences. The complainant sent legal notice through his Advocate on 6/8/2017 but in spite of receipt of the notice, he did not make any payment till the date of filing of the complaint case. Hence, the complaint was made before the Magistrate concerned.

(3.) The accused was summoned by the court concerned for the offence under Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act. After the appearance of the accused, the substance of acquisition was stated to the accused by the Magistrate concerned under Sec. 251 Cr.P.C. which he denied and did not plead guilty, rather claimed to face the trial.