Bangalore District Court
Sri J.N.Gurappa Reddy vs Sri N.Rajanna on 21 June, 2016
IN THE COURT OF THE XXII ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITON
MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE CITY
Dated this the 21st day of June , 2016,
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.4580/2016
Complainant : Sri J.N.GURAPPA REDDY ,
Son of Narayanaswamy, Reddy,
R/at No. 21/2, Jaraganahalli,
Rajiv Gandhi Road Cross,
J.P.Nagara 6th Phase,
Bangalore - 560 078.
(By Sri.RAJESH. G..Adv.)
V/s.
Accused : Sri N.RAJANNA,
"Sagar Auto Consultants"
No.374, 2nd Stage, 2nd Phase,
West of Chord Road,
Bangalore - 560 086.
(By Sri R.R.ASSOCIATES,.Adv.)
Date of Institution 13-2-2016.
Offence complained of U/s 138 of N.I.Act.
Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
Final Order Accused is CONVICTED.
Date of Order : 21.06.2016.
2 C.C.No.4580/2016
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 complainant submits that, the complainant has got
acquaintances with the accused and the accused is running
" Sagar Auto Consultant", having True Value Second Hand Cars
Dealership -showroom and the complainant has made full and
final payment of Rs.2,90,000/- by way of cash and cheque in
different dates towards purchase of MARUTI SWIFT VXI Car
bearing Reg.No.KA-04-MC-6292 and the accused had executed
the Sale Agreement dated 21-12-2014 and cash receipt, dated 9-
1-2015. At the time of giving money the accused assured and also
promised to deliver the said vehicle after it is transferred to the
complainant's name, which is also clearly mentioned in the cash
receipt executed by the accused. With regard to get the said
vehicle transferred to his name and also to get the delivery of the
vehicle, the complainant has been visiting his showroom number
of times and when the complainant came to know that the said
vehicle has been transferred to other persons, the accused with a
3 C.C.No.4580/2016
malafide intention to deceive the complainant had sold off the
above described vehicle and the complainant has got issued a
legal notice and also lodged police complaint against the accused
in this regard. When the complainant approached the accused to
deliver the Car or refund back the money being the sale
consideration amount at the time of his son's marriage and on
several other occasions the accused assured and further promised
to clear the sale consideration amount in installments and the
accused had issued a cheque bearing No.213909 dated 22-12-
2015 for Rs.50,000/- drawn on Axis Bank ,Sanjay Nagar branch,
Bangalore in favour of the complainant. While issuing the said
cheque the accused promised and assured the complainant that
the said cheque will be honoured on its presentation on the due
date. As per the assurance of the accused, the complainant has
presented the said cheque for encashment through his banker
Syndicate Bank, Yediyur, Jayanagara 7th Block branch,
Bangalore. But the said cheque came to be dishonoured with the
bank endorsement for the reasons "Funds insufficient" dated 29-
12-2015. Immediately the complainant approached the accused
and informed him about the dishonour of the cheque and
demanded to pay the amount covered under the cheque .But the
accused had drag on the same on one pretext or the other. The
4 C.C.No.4580/2016
complainant left with no other alternative got issued legal notice
through RPAD on 11-01-2016 to the accused, calling upon the
accused to pay the cheque amount . As per the Net Tracking copy,
the notice sent by RPAD was served to the accused on 12-01-
2016 . Inspite of 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 punish the accused in
accordance with law and to award suitable compensation as per
Sec.357 of Cr.P.C., 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.P11 . Inspite of sufficient
opportunity has been given the accused counsel did not cross-
examined the PW-1 and hence, the cross-examination of PW-1
taken as nil and thus complainant closed his side evidence.
4. There afterwards, the accused examined u/s.313 of
Cr.P.C. in which, he totally denied the entire case of complainant .
5 C.C.No.4580/2016
He in support of his denial, he submits his side no defence
evidence.
5. In support of the case of complainant, the Ln.counsel for
complainant submitted written arguments by narrating the facts
and circumstances of the case and stated that complainant had
proved the alleged guilt of the accused . Hence, he prays for
convicting of the accused in accordance with law.
6. I have heard the arguments of accused counsel on merit.
7. 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). Further
got marked Ex.P2 is an endorsement issued by the bankers
stating that Ex.P1 cheque was dishonoured due to "Funds
insufficient". Ex.P3 is the copy of legal notice . This notice does
not contain the signature of the complainant except his counsel .
Ex.P4 is the postal receipt. Ex.P5 is the letter addressed to the
Post Master for confirmation of Speed Post delivered to the
accused. Ex.P6 is the Speed Net tracking report of India Post to
show legal notice sent to the accused was duly served. Ex.P7 is
6 C.C.No.4580/2016
the certified copy of the Department of Post Office to show that
the legal notice sent to the accused was duly served. Ex.P8 is the
complaint lodged by the complainant against the accused. Ex.P9
is the Attested true copy of the Loan Sanctioned Letter of Muthoot
Finance Limited. Ex.P10 is the certified copy of the Sale
Agreement . Ex.P11 is the cash receipt issued by the accused in
favour of the complainant for purchase of Suzuki Swift Car.
8. On the basis of the oral evidence adduced by the
complainant coupled with the documentary evidence , which
clearly supports the case of complainant. In order to disprove the
case of the complainant, inspite of sufficient opportunity has been
given the accused counsel did not chose to cross-examine the
PW-1 but accused submits that he has no defence evidence at the
time of recording statement of accused u/s. 313 of cr.P.C.. These
things are clearly establish that there is no defence evidence of
accused and the accused has not given any rebuttable evidence to
the case of complainant.
9. In support of the case of complainant , the learned
counsel for the complainant submitted written arguments by
narrating the facts and circumstances of the case and submits
7 C.C.No.4580/2016
that the complainant had proved the alleged guilt of the accused
beyond all reasonable doubt.
10. In support of the case of accused, the learned counsel
for the accused except oral say of his arguments but the counsel
for accused did not cross-examined the PW-1 and also the
accused did not chose to lead his side defence evidence. As such,
the evidence of PW-1 and documentary evidence of the
complainant are remained unchallenged. Hence, accused is liable
for conviction as per law. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
Acting under Sec.265 of Cr.P.C. accused is Convicted for the offence punishable u/s 138 of N.I.Act and accused is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- ( Rs..One thousand only) . In default of payment of fine amount, the accused shall undergo S.I. for a period of One month.
The complainant was awarded compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs.One lakh only) i.e. double the cheque amount and the same shall be paid to the complainant by the accused within 30 days from the date of this order.
In default of payment of compensation amount, the accused shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of One year.
8 C.C.No.4580/2016Office is directed to supply free copy of this judgment to the accused forthwith.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 21st day of June, 2016) (NAGARAJEGOWDA.D) XXII ACMM, Bangalore city.
ANNEXURE Witnesses examined for the Complainant:
PW.1 : J.N.Gurappa Reddy.
Witness examined for the accused:
nil :
List of Documents marked for the Complainant:
Ex.P1 : Cheque
Ex.P1a : Signature of the accused
Ex.P2 : Endorsement
Ex.P3 : Legal notice
Ex.P4 : Postal receipt
Ex.P5 : Complaint to the Post Master
Ex.P6 : Speed Net tracking report of India
post.
Ex.P7 Copy of delivery slip .
Ex.P8 Complaint to the Deputy
Commissioner of Police.
Ex.P9 Customer copy of Muthoot Finance
Ltd.,
9 C.C.No.4580/2016
Ex.P10 Copy of Sale Agreement of Sagar
Auto Consultants.
Ex.P11 Cash receipt.
List of Documents marked for the accused:
Nil. :
XXII ACMM, Bangalore.