Bangalore District Court
Sri.P.Channakeshava vs Sri. V. Byra Reddy on 17 July, 2015
IN THE COURT OF THE XXII ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITON
MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE CITY
Dated this the 17th day of July, 2015
PRESENT: SRI. NAGARAJEGOWDA.D, B.Com., LL.B.,
XXII Addl.C.M.M., Bangalore City.
JUDGMENT U/S 355 OF Cr.P.C.
C.C.No. 19242/2012
Complainant : Sri.P.Channakeshava,
Son of Sri P.Subbaiah Setty
R/at No.14/2, 24th A Cross road,
6th A Main Road,
Karisandara,
Banahashankari 2nd stage,
Bangalore- 560 070.
(By Sri M.Ramachandra reddy,Adv)
V/s.
Accused : Sri. V. Byra Reddy,
Son of late Venkata Reddy,
Aged 52 years,
No.72, 14th main road, 24th Cross,
Kumara swamy layout 1st stage,
Bangalore 78.
(By Sri Sathyanarayana chalke,Adv)
Date of Institution 15/9/2011
Offence complained of U/s 138 of N.I.Act.
Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
Final Order Accused is Acquitted
Date of Order : 17 .07.2015.
2 C.C.No.19242/2012
The complainant filed the private complaint u/s 200 of
Cr.P.C alleging that, the accused person has committed an offence
punishable u/s 138 of N.I.Act.
REASONS
The brief facts of the complainant case is as follows:-
2. The accused is known person to this complainant for the
last several years. The accused has obtained hand loan of
Rs.5,00,000/- in the month of Jan. 2009 representing that he is
putting up residential building and in order to complete the
construction, he is facing financial hardship and he has offered to
repay the amount in the month of Feb.2011 . On believing the
assurance of accused , the complainant paid the said sum in the
month of Jan.2009 by way of cash . After receipt of the loan
amount as undertaken by the accused, he did not repay the loan
amount . Inspite of demand, the accused issued two post dated
cheques No. 003129 and 003130 dated 3-6-2011 drawn on
Shushruti Souharda Sahakara Bank, Niyamitha Vallabhanagar,
Chikkalsandra, Bangalore for Rs.2,50,000/- each and requested
the complainant to present the cheque for collection, the same
will be honoured. Accordingly, the complainant presented the first
3 C.C.No.19242/2012
cheque No.003129 through his I.O.B. Bank , Banashankari 2nd
stage branch, Bangalore on 18-7-2011 but the said cheque
returned unpaid with an endorsement to that effect "Funds
insufficient" dated 19-7-2011. Thereafterwards, the complainant
got issued legal notice dtd 2-8-2011 to the accused, calling upon
the accused to pay the cheque amount . The accused has refused
to receive the said notice sent by RPAD on 8-8-2011 and despite
the receipt of legal notice, he did not replied or complied the
notice and thus accused committed the offence punishable u/s.
138 and 142 of NI Act and issue FLW u/s. 157 of Cr P.C. and
grant such other relief or relief's as deemed fit and proper to grant
in the circumstances of the case with cost , in the interest of
justice and equity.
3. The accused appeared before this court and contest this
case by denying the entire case of complainant at the time of
recording of Plea of Accusation . In order to prove the case of
complainant, he adduced his oral evidence as PW-1 by way of
affidavit and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P6 and this PW-1 has been
fully cross examined by the accused counsel and thus
complainant closed his side evidence.
4 C.C.No.19242/2012
4. There afterwards, the accused examined u/s.313 of
Cr.P.C. in which, he totally denied the entire case of complainant .
He in support of his denial, he submits his side no defence
evidence and hence this court taken his side defence evidence NIL
and thus closed his side defence evidence.
5. In support of the case of complainant, the Ln. counsel for
complainant did not address arguments on merit inspite of
sufficient opportunity has been given. But the Ln.counsel for
accused submitted his arguments on merit and prays for acquittal
of the accused.
6. In order to prove the case of complainant, the
complainant adduced his oral evidence as PW-1 filed by way of
affidavit. In which, he reiterated complaint contention and got
marked Ex.P1 cheque alleged to be issued by the accused and
identified the signature of the accused as per Ex.P1(a). This
issuance of cheque in favour of complainant for discharge of legal
liability has been disputed by the accused. Ex.P2 is the challan
with respect of Ex.P1 cheque . Further got marked Ex.P3 is an
endorsement issued by the bankers stating that Ex.P1 cheque is
dishonoured due to "Funds insufficient". Ex.P4 is the copy of legal
notice. This notice does not contain the signature of the
5 C.C.No.19242/2012
complainant except his counsel . Ex.P5 is the RPAD postal
receipt. Ex.P6 is the postal cover sent to the accused is returned
with postal shara " Addressee refused and hence returned". As
per the case of complainant, the accused did not comply the
terms of notice and thus he has committed the offence punishable
u/s.138 of NI Act.
7. The accused has denied the entire case of complainant at
the time of recording statement of accused u/s.313 of Cr.P.C. ,
But in support of his defence, accused submitted his side no
defence evidence . However, accused counsel cross-examined the
PW-1 . In the cross-examination , he tried to elicited that he
admitted that he used to go to the shop of accused and at that
time, one Manju also appeared in the shop of accused but he
denied that sometime accused went away from the shop at the
time himself sitting in his shop except he had a bank account at
I.O.B. bank , he do not have any other bank account. He is doing
catering work and he do not know his income and there are three
persons working under him and he has not shown in his IT
returns about the loan amount advanced to this accused and he
drawn the said amount from the Classic Finance, Domlur as a
loan on interest basis and he used to deposit his savings amount
to his bank account. He do not know on what date and month he
6 C.C.No.19242/2012
paid the loan amount to this accused but in the year 2009 he
paid the amount and he do not know the contents of notice sent
to this accused but on the date of paying loan amount to this
accused issued Ex.P1 cheque but he do not know who has
written the contents of the cheque , but he identified the
signature of the accused as per Ex.P1(a) and the Ex.P4 legal
notice is not duly served to the accused , but the same was
returned unclaimed but he denied that when he visited to the
shop of accused along with one Manju, he took signed blank
cheque in five numbers and four blank stamp paper but admitted
that another cheque is not presented to the bank . He admitted
that he had no income to show he paid huge amount of Rs.Five
lakhs to this accused and he denied that he filed false case
against the accused etc.
8. On the basis of the cross-examination of PW-1 in order to
show that the complainant had paid huge amount of Rs.Five
lakhs to this accused and in his complaint he has not specifically
stated the date, month except he paid the said amount in the
year, 2009 and the said amount has been obtained from the
Classic Finance on interest basis . For that, he has not produced
any corroborative evidence. Hence, the complainant case create
doubtful whether he really paid the huge amount of Rs. Five lakhs
7 C.C.No.19242/2012
to the accused and for repayment of the said amount , he issued
Ex.P1 cheque , the same is dishonoured due to "Funds
insufficient". Though accused did not stepped into the witness
box to depose his case however, his counsel cross-examined the
PW-1 and he tried to elicited the suggestion that the alleged
cheque in question issued and the same has been misused by the
complainant etc.. Under such circumstances, the case of
complainant create doubtful. The accused has given rebuttal
evidence to the case of complainant. The complainant has failed
to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.
Hence, accused is entitled for acquittal. Accordingly, I pass the
following:
ORDER
Acting u/s 265 of Cr.P.C., the accused is acquitted from the alleged offence punishable u/s 138 of N.I.Act.
Accused is set at liberty. His bail bond and surety bond shall stand cancelled.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 17th day of July, 2015) (NAGARAJEGOWDA.D) XXII ACMM, Bangalore city.
8 C.C.No.19242/2012ANNEXURE Witnesses examined for the Complainant:
PW.1 : S.Channakeshava Witness examined for the accused:
NIL :
List of Documents marked for the Complainant:
Ex.P1 : Cheque Ex.P1a : Signature of the accused Ex.P2 : Counterfoil Ex.P3 : Bank endorsement Ex.P4 Legal notice Ex.P5 : Postal receipt Ex.P6 : Postal cover
List of Documents marked for the accused:
NIL XXII ACMM, Bangalore.