Bangalore District Court
Mr. Devindrappa.S.A vs ) Sri. Raghavendra on 5 September, 2019
IN THE COURT OF THE XII ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
:: PRESENT ::
SRI. NAGARAJEGOWDA.D., B.Com, L.L.B.,
C/C. XII A.C.M.M., Bengaluru
C.C.NO.23754/2017
Dated: This the 5th Day of SEPTEMBER -2019
COMPLAINANT/S: Mr. Devindrappa.S.A.,
S/o. Late Shivaramappa,
Proprietor: Sri Rama Enterprises,
Dealers in Coal, Coke &
Transport contractor,
No:21, Chikkagollarahatti,
Magadi Main Road,
(Near Sandya Weigh Bridge)
Vishwaneedam Post,
Bengaluru - 560 091.
ACCUSED: 1) Sri. Raghavendra,
Aged about 35 years,
S/o. K.B.Gopal,
M/s. Raghavendra Chamber
Bricks (RCB Bricks),
Factory at: Thubarahalli,
Near Solur,
Kunigal Road,
Magadi Taluk,
Ramanagar District.
AND
Residing at: Manjunatha Swamy
Nilaya,
M/s. Raghavendra Chamber
Bricks (RCB Bricks),
R/o. No:123, 2nd Main,
JUDGMENT 2 CC.NO:23754/2017
Telephone Layout,
Kottigepalya,
Bengaluru - 560 091.
2) Sri. K.B.Gopal,
Aged about 58 years,
(Father's name not know)
Proprietor: M/s. Raghavendra
Chamber Bricks (RCB Bricks),
Factory at: Thubarahalli,
Near Solur,
Kunigal Road,
Magadi Taluk,
Ramanagar District.
AND
Residing at: No:517, Sri
Manjunatha Nilaya,
1st "D" Cross, 3rd Stage,
4th Division, Basaveshwaranagar,
Bengaluru - 560 079.
Offence Under Section 138 of Negotiable
Instruments Act
Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
Final Order Convicted
**
:: JUDGMENT ::
The complainant filed this private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C alleging that, the accused has JUDGMENT 3 CC.NO:23754/2017 committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. The brief facts of the complainant case reads as follows:
The complainant is carrying on business as Proprietary concern in the name and style as Sri Rama Enterprises, dealers in Coal, Coke and transport contractor and having VAT registration certificate and current account in the then State Bank of Mysore, presently State Bank of India, Yeshwanthpur Branch, Bengaluru. The accused No.1 is the son and accused No.2 is the father, are carrying on family business in the name and style as M/s. Raghavendra Chamber Bricks (RCB Bricks), Proprietary concern and the accused No.2 is said to be the Proprietor, requested to place orders from time to time to the complainant over phones for supply of Steam Coal from time to time and the complainant being acquainted with the accused had supplied required quantity of Steam coal to accused from time to time in total quantity of 158340 kgs worth Rs.9,24,900/- during the period from 25/12/2014 to 08/06/2017 as per the credit Invoices JUDGMENT 4 CC.NO:23754/2017 raised in that behalf in the name of Raghavendra, M/s. Raghavendra Chamber Bricks at Kunigal Road, Magadi Taluk, Ramanagar District. After demand to the accused from time to time to make payment of outstanding dues over phone, the accused issued two cheques bearing Nos:969712 dated 22/05/2017 for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- and Cheque bearing No:969713 dated 27/05/2017 for a sum of Rs.3,00,397/- during the 4th week of May 2017 drawn on Vijaya Bank, Solur Branch and there afterwards as per credit Invoice dated 08/06/2017 purchased steam coal of quantity of 13620 kgs being supplied on 08/06/2017. The accused finalized the accounts outstanding dues payable and issued cheque bearing No:969714 dated 09/06/2017 for sum of Rs.3,24,503/-in total sum of Rs.9,24,900/- drawn on Vijaya Bank, Solur Branch and requesting the complainant to present all the three cheques on or after 15/07/2017. The complainant presented the said cheques through his Banker State Bank of India, Yeshwanthpur Branch, Bengaluru on 17/07/2017. But the said cheques are dishonoured and returned unpaid with an endorsement to that effect as JUDGMENT 5 CC.NO:23754/2017 "Funds insufficient" as per memo dated 19/07/2017. There afterwards, the complainant got issued legal notice to the accused on 10/08/2017 sent by RPAD to both the factory and residential address of the accused and also by courier service of Professional couriers and DTDC couriers. The notice issued by RPAD to the residential address on 14/08/2017 is duly served to the accused, but the notice issued by RPAD to the factory address of the accused are returned unserved with the postal endorsement "Addressee refused", and the notice sent by Professional courier service to the factory address also returned with the endorsement "Party refused", and the notice sent through DTDC courier service to the residential address of the accused No.1 is returned with the endorsement "Party refused to take" and the cover addressed to accused No.2 is served as per internet tracking report of DTDC courier. But the accused failed to make payment of the 3 cheque amounts within 15 days of the receipt of legal notice. Thereby, the accused have committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments JUDGMENT 6 CC.NO:23754/2017 Act and punish the accused persons in accordance with law in the interest of justice.
3. After recording the sworn statement of the complainant with documentary evidence, this court has registered the case against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Summons issued to the accused. The accused appeared through their counsel and enlarged on bail. There afterwards, plea of accusation read over and explained to the accused No.1 and 2 in the language known by them and they pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.
4. In support of the case of the complainant, earlier the complainant given sworn statement as PW-1 filed by way of affidavit and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.32 and this PW-1 has been fully cross-examined by the accused counsel and further got marked Ex.P.33 to Ex.P.40 and this PW-1 has been fully cross-examined by the accused counsel and thus the complainant closed his side evidence.
JUDGMENT 7 CC.NO:23754/2017
5. In support of the case of the accused, at the time of recording the 313 Cr.P.C statement of the accused, both the accused denied the entire case of the complainant and in support of their denial, the accused No.1 is examined as D.W.1 and through him got marked Ex.D.1 to Ex.D.19 and accused No.2 is examined as D.W.2 and these D.W.1 and D.W.2 have been fully cross-examined by the complainant counsel. Thus the accused closed their side evidence.
6. In support of the case of the complainant, the learned counsel for the complainant submitted written arguments by narrating the facts and circumstances of the case and relying on the judgment of Criminal Appeal No.59/2016 on the file of LXVII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in which on 1st July 2016 the court passed the judgment by confirming the judgment of XVIII A.C.M.M. i.e., the conviction order passed on 30/12/2013 and also relying on the judgment of CC.No:14784/2013 on the file of XVIII ACMM, Bengaluru by convicting the accused.
JUDGMENT 8 CC.NO:23754/2017
7. I have heard the arguments of accused counsel on merits and the accused counsel submits that the accused had given a rebuttable evidence to the case of the complainant and hence he prays for acquittal of the accused in accordance with law. The accused counsel filed memo on 18/02/2019 the guidelines issued by the Commercial Department on 5/3/2014 regarding Value Added Tax Act etc. In support of the case of the accused, the learned counsel for the accused relied on the following citations.
(i) Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka judgment in 2009-3 KCCR-(SN)-158, 2009-ILR-1633-Kar (M/s. Kumar Exports V/s. M/s. Sharma Carpets) in which Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka held that the presumption therefore is a matter of principle to facilitate negotiability as well as trade. Section 118 of the Act provides presumptions to be raised until the contrary is proved (i) as to consideration.
(ii) 2017 (4) AKR 451 (Vijay laxmi V/s. Mohammed Pasha) in which Hon'ble Kalburgi Bench of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka held that entry in respect of supply of goods in ledger, found suspicious - Ledger books not audited by qualified auditor - alleged transaction not proved -
acquittal proper.
JUDGMENT 9 CC.NO:23754/2017 Accordingly, the learned counsel for the accused prays for acquittal of the accused in accordance with law.
8. On the basis of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the following points arises for my considerations:
POINTS
1. Whether the complainant proves beyond all reasonable doubts that for repayment of the goods supplied to the accused for Rs.9,24,900/-, the accused persons issued 3 cheques bearing No:969712 dated 22/05/2017 for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- and Cheque bearing No:969713 dated 27/05/2017 for a sum of Rs.3,00,397/- and another cheque bearing No:969714 dated 09/06/2017 for sum of Rs.3,24,503/- in total sum of Rs.9,24,900/- drawn on Vijaya Bank, Solur Branch given to the complainant. The complainant presented the said cheques for collection through State Bank of India, Yeshwanthpur Branch, Bengaluru on 17/07/2017. But the said cheques are dishonoured due to "Funds insufficient" and in spite of issuance of legal notice to the accused persons on 10/08/2017 sent by RPAD and JUDGMENT 10 CC.NO:23754/2017 also courier service, the notice sent to the accused to the factory and accused residential address is duly served but the factory address notice is returned as "Addressee refused". But the accused did not reply or complied the notice and thus he has committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act?
2. What order?
9. My answer to the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Affirmative,
Points No.2: As per the final order,
for the following.
REASONS
10. POINT No.1: The complainant filed affidavit by way of sworn statement as PW-1, in which he stated that he is carrying on business as Proprietary concern in the name and style as Sri Rama Enterprises, dealers in Coal, Coke and transport contractor and having VAT registration certificate and current account in the then State Bank of Mysore, presently State Bank of India, Yeshwanthpur Branch, Bengaluru. The accused No.1 is the son and JUDGMENT 11 CC.NO:23754/2017 accused No.2 is the father, are carrying on family business in the name and style as M/s. Raghavendra Chamber Bricks (RCB Bricks), Proprietary concern and the accused No.2 is said to be the Proprietor, requested to place orders from time to time to the complainant over phones for supply of Steam Coal and he had supplied the required quantity of Steam Coal to the accused for total quantity of of 158340 kgs worth Rs.9,24,900/- during the period from 25/12/2014 to 08/06/2017 as per the credit Invoices raised in the name of Raghavendra, M/s. Raghavendra Chamber Bricks. He made repeated requests and demand to the accused for payment of outstanding dues over phone and in response to the same the accused have issued two cheques bearing Nos:969712 dated 22/05/2017 for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- and Cheque bearing No:969713 dated 27/05/2017 for a sum of Rs.3,00,397/- and in the 4th week of May 2017 drawn on Vijaya Bank, Solur Branch and there afterwards as per credit Invoice dated 08/06/2017, the accused persons have purchased steam coal of quantity of 13620 kgs being supplied on 08/06/2017. The accused finalized the accounts JUDGMENT 12 CC.NO:23754/2017 outstanding dues payable and issued cheque bearing No:969714 dated 09/06/2017 for sum of Rs.3,24,503/-in total sum of Rs.9,24,900/- drawn on Vijaya Bank, Solur Branch and requesting the complainant to present all the three cheques on or after 15/07/2017 and the same will be honoured on its presentation. Accordingly, the complainant presented the three cheques to his account No:54027080407 in State Bank of India, Yeshwanthpur Branch, Bengaluru on 17/07/2017, but the said 3 cheques are returned unpaid on the grounds as "Funds insufficient" as per memo dated 19/07/2017. There afterwards, he got issued legal notice on 10/08/2017 sent by RPAD to both factory and residential address and also by courier service by Professional couriers and DTDC couriers. The accused have acknowledged the notices sent by RPAD to the residential address on 14/08/2017 as per track consignment report issued by Postal department. The notice issued by RPAD to the factory address of the accused are returned unserved with the postal endorsement as "addressee refused". The statutory legal notices sent through Professional courier service to the JUDGMENT 13 CC.NO:23754/2017 factory address of the accused have been returned with the endorsement "Party refused". The statutory notice sent through DTDC courier service to the residential address of the accused, the cover addressed to accused No.1 is returned with an endorsement "Party refused to take" and the cover addressed to accused No.2 is served as per internet track report of DTDC courier service. In spite of service of notice, they did not reply or complied the notice and thus they have committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.40. Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.3 are the cheques alleged to be issued by the accused and identified the signature of the accused as Ex.P.1(a) to Ex.P.3(a). Ex.P.4 and Ex.P.5 are the Account Pay-in-slips for deposit of Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.3 cheques into the Bank. Ex.P.6 to Ex.P.8 are the endorsements issued by the Banker stating that the said Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.3 cheques are dishonoured due to "Funds insufficient". Ex.P.9 is the copy of legal notice sent to the accused No.1 and 2 by RPAD as per Ex.P.10 to Ex.P.13 are the RPAD receipts and Ex.P.14 is the Department of Post tracking consignment to show that JUDGMENT 14 CC.NO:23754/2017 the notice is duly served. Ex.P.15 is the another postal track consignment to show that the notice issued to the accused persons are duly served. Ex.P.16 and Ex.P.17 are the RPAD notice is returned with the shara "Party refused to take notice". Ex.P.18 and Ex.P.19 are the Professional courier service receipts. Ex.P.20 and Ex.P.21 are the notice sent by DTDC courier service returned with the shara "Not responding party". Ex.P.22 and Ex.P.23 are the DTDC courier receipts. Ex.P.24 is the courier notice is returned with the shara "Party refused". Ex.P.25 is the DTDC courier track consignment. Ex.P.26 is the statement of accounts of State Bank of India stands in the name of the complainant Sri Rama Enterprises of the year 2017 to show transfer of internet banking for an amount of Rs.10,750/-, 16,500/- etc. Ex.P.27 are the 14 cash / credit bills bearing No:471, 128, 999, 965, 960, 959, 963, 958, 953, 920, 964, 919, 894, and 816 dated 08/06/2017 and 25/12/2014 stands in the name of accused No.1 to show various coal supplied to him by mentioning the Lorry numbers. Ex.P.28 is the balance sheet of the complainant as at 31/03/2017, in which there is a total balance of JUDGMENT 15 CC.NO:23754/2017 Rs.48,47,703/-. Ex.P.29 is the another Trading, Profit and Loss account for the year ending 31/03/2017 stands in the name of the complainant Sri Rama Enterprises showing total of Rs.12,18,581/-. Ex.P.30 is the Sri Rama Enterprises letter dated 08/06/2017 in the name of accused No.1 showing an amount of Rs.9,24,900/- is pending from the accused. Ex.P.31 is the "B" Register Extract of Registration No:KA 02C 5935 of the Lorry. Ex.P.32 is the another "B" Register Extract of vehicle No:
KA 02B 7440. Ex.P.33 is the sales for the month of December 2014 stands in the name of various persons including the accused Raghavendra Chamber Bricks and Ex.P.33(a) is the VAT 100 in the name of the complainant Sri Rama Enterprises. Ex.P.34 is the sales for the month of September 2015 stands in the name of Sri Rama Enterprises along with VAT certificate as per Ex.P.34(a), in which on 26/09/2015 there is sales in the name of Raghavendra Chamber Bricks for quantity of coal supplied to them. Ex.P.35 and Ex.P.35(a) are the sales for the month of November 2015 stands in the name of Sri Rama Enterprises to show the supply of coal to the accused JUDGMENT 16 CC.NO:23754/2017 company VAT certificate as per Ex.P.35(a). Ex.P.36 and Ex.P.36(a) are the sales for the month of February 2016 stands in the name of Sri Rama Enterprises i.e., the complainant in which on various dates coal has been supplied to the accused company VAT certificate as per Ex.P.36(a). Ex.P.37 and Ex.P.37(a) are the sales for the month of May 2016 stands in the name of the complainant Sri Rama Enterprises, in which on 03/05/2016 supply of coal is made to the accused company along with the VAT certificate as per Ex.P.37(a). Ex.P.38 and Ex.P.38(a) are the sales for the month September 2016 of the complainant Sri Rama Enterprises in which on 12/06/2016 supply of coal is made to Raghavendra Chamber Bricks long with the VAT certificate as per Ex.P.38(a). Ex.P.39 and Ex.P.39(a) are the sales for the month of June 2017 of Sri Rama Enterprises for supply of coal to the accused company along with VAT 100 as per Ex.P.39(a) and Ex.P.40 is the IT returns for the assessment year 2017-18 in the name of Shivaramappa Ambulage Devindrappa. On the basis of the oral and documentary evidence of the complainant, the complainant prima facie JUDGMENT 17 CC.NO:23754/2017 proves the supply of coal and various materials to the accused company. But the complainant had denied the said facts and he has not at all obtained any materials from the complainant company and in the cross- examination of PW-1 he denied the entire case of the accused contention stating that the accused obtained an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- from the complainant and he repaid long back and at that time issued Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.3 cheques and the same are not returned by the complainant stating that he has misplaced the said cheques and after trace out he returned the said documents etc. Except total denial of the case of the complainant, the accused failed to disprove the case of the complainant stating that the accused has not at all received any coal from the complainant. Except total denial of the case of the complainant contention, the accused failed to give rebuttable evidence to the case of the complainant.
11. In support of the defence taken by the accused No.1, he has been examined as D.W.1 and accused No.2 was examined as D.W.2 and both of them in their chief-
JUDGMENT 18 CC.NO:23754/2017 examination have stated that they know the complainant and they are the family friends and availed hand loan of Rs.3,00,000/- from the complainant and at the time of availing hand loan issued 3 cheques in question for purpose of security and they have cleared the loan long back and requested the complainant to return the cheques, but at that time the complainant informed that he has misplaced the said cheques and promised that he will return the same immediately after tracing the same etc. But surprisingly issued the dishonour of the cheque notice stating that they have supplied some coal of quality of 158340 kgs worth Rs.9,24,900/- during the period from 25/12/2014 to 08/06/2017 in the name of M/s. Raghavendra Chamber Bricks. But they have never supplied coal to this accused, but the accused purchased the coal from different persons, for that got marked Ex.D.1 is the VAT 100 stands in the name of the accused Raghavendra Chamber Bricks and in the month of April- June 2013 they purchased the coal from different persons. Further got marked Ex.D.2 is the another VAT certificate returns for the month of Oct-Dec-2013 in the name of JUDGMENT 19 CC.NO:23754/2017 Raghavendra Chamber Bricks. Ex.D.3 is the another VAT returns of the month of July-September 2014 in the name of Raghavendra Chamber Bricks. Ex.D.4 is the Form VAT 100 returns in the month of October-December 2014 in the name of Raghavendra Chamber Bricks for purchase of coal. Ex.D.5 is the another VAT returns in the month of January-March-2015 for purchase of coal from different persons. Ex.D.6 is the anther VAT 100 returns in the month of April-June 2015 for purchase of coal. Ex.D.7 is the another Form VAT 100 returns in the month of July- September-2015 for purchase of coal from different persons. Ex.D.8 is the another Form VAT 100 for the month of October-December 2015 for purchase of coal from different persons. Ex.D.9 is the another Form VAT 100 returns in the month of January - March 2016 for purchase of coal. Ex.D.10 is the another Form VAT 100 returns in the month of April-June 2016 for purchase of coal in the name of the accused Raghavendra Chamber Bricks. Ex.D.11 is the another Form VAT 100 returns in the month of July-September 2016 for purchase of coal from different persons. Ex.D.12 is the Form 152 Taxes on JUDGMENT 20 CC.NO:23754/2017 Sales Trade etc., in the name of the accused company and on 13/11/2016 they have paid tax to the Government and Ex.D.13 is the another Form VAT 100 returns of the month of October-December 2016 stands in the name of Raghavendra Chamber Bricks. Ex.D.14 is the Form VAT 100 returns on 22/07/2018 in the name of Raghavendra Chamber Bricks for purchase of coal. Ex.D.15 is the Tax Invoice of Prabhat Enterprises in the name of Raghavendra Chamber Bricks dated 26/12/2014 for supply of steam coal worth Rs.69,196/-. Ex.D.16 is the Tax Invoice of Sri. Nirmal Enterprises stands in the name of Raghavendra Chamber Bricks dated 30/04/2015 for an amount of Rs.79,315/- for supply of coal. Ex.D.17 is the anther Tax Inovice dated 18/11/2015 of Laxmi Agencies stands in the name of Raghavendra Chamber Bricks for an amount of Rs.85,718/- towards supply of coal. Ex.D.18 is the another Tax Invoice of Prabhat Enterprises in the name of Raghavendra Chamber Bricks dated 28/12/2015 for an amount of Rs.61,189/- towards supply of coal. Ex.D.19 is the another Tax Invoice of Prabhat Enterprises in the name JUDGMENT 21 CC.NO:23754/2017 of Raghavendra Chamber Bricks of 31/01/2016 for purchase of coal worth Rs.63,171/-.
12. In the cross-examination of DW-1 and D.W.2, they have denied the entire case of the complainant stating that they have not at all purchased any coal from the complainant company and the alleged documentary evidence produced by the complainant are created for the purpose of this case and they have taken specific contention that without mentioning the exact date, the accused obtained loan amount of Rs.3,00,000/- from the complainant and they have repaid the said amount long back and at the time of availing loan amount of Rs.3,00,000/- from the complainant, they have issued 3 cheques in question for the purpose of security and after repayment of the said loan amount long back, the complainant did not return the cheques, but same are misplaced and for that the accused has not produced any documentary evidence to support their contention and also they have not replied to the demand notice issued by the complainant though the same is duly served upon them.
JUDGMENT 22 CC.NO:23754/2017 As such, the arguments submitted by the accused counsel and also the rulings and the decisions reported as stated above are squarely applicable to the case of the accused to show that the accused had given a rebuttable evidence to the case of the complainant. On the other hand, the written arguments submitted by the complainant and also the judgment of the court produced by the complainant counsel are squarely applicable to the case of the complainant to show that the complainant had proved the alleged guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. Hence, the accused is liable for conviction as per law. Accordingly, I answered Point No.1 in the affirmative.
13. POINT NO.2: From the forgoing reasons, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section 255(2) Cr.P.C the accused is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.18,49,800/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Forty JUDGMENT 23 CC.NO:23754/2017 Nine Thousand Eight Hundred only). The same shall be paid by the accused within a period of 30 days from the date of this order.
Out of the said fine amount, a sum of Rs.18,47,800/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Forty Seven Thousand Eight Hundred only) has been awarded to the complainant as compensation under Section 357 of Cr.P.C. In default of payment of fine amount, the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for 2 (two) years.
The rest of Rs.2,000/- (Two Thousand Only) is adjusted towards the state as fine. (Dictated to the stenographer, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 5th day of September 2019) (NAGARAJEGOWDA.D) C/C. XII Addl. C.M.M., Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE Witness examined on behalf of the complainant:
PW-1 : Mr. Devindrappa.S.A. JUDGMENT 24 CC.NO:23754/2017
Documents marked on behalf of the complainant:
Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.3 : 3 cheques. Ex.P.4 and Ex.P.5 : Bank pay-in-slips Ex.P.6 to Ex.P.8 : Bank endorsements. Ex.P.9 : Legal notice Ex.P.10 to Ex.P.13 : Postal receipts.
Ex.P.14 and Ex.P.15 : India Post consignment tracking sheets.
Ex.P.16 and Ex.P.17 : Unserved postal covers Ex.P.18 and Ex.P.19 : Courier receipts Ex.P.20 and Ex.P.21 : RPAD cover Ex.P.22 and Ex.P.23 : Courier receipts Ex.P.24 : Unserved postal cover Ex.P.25 : DTDC courier tracking sheet.
Ex.P.26 : Statement of accounts Ex.P.27 : Credit Bill Ex.P.28 and Ex.P.29 : Balance sheet Ex.P.30 : Statement of accounts
Ex.P.31 and Ex.P.32 : "B" Extract of HGV-Vehicle Ex.P.33 : Sales transaction sheet for December-2014.
Ex.P.33(a) : VAT returns filing
JUDGMENT 25 CC.NO:23754/2017
Ex.P.34 : Sales transaction sheet for
September-2015.
Ex.P. 34(a) : VAT returns
Ex.P.35 : Sales transaction sheet for
November-2015.
Ex.P.35(a) : VAT returns
Ex.P.36 : Sales transaction sheet for
February-2016.
Ex.P.36(a) : VAT returns
Ex.P.37 : Sales transaction sheet for
May-2016.
Ex.P.37(a) : VAT returns filing
Ex.P.38 : Sales transaction sheet for
September-2016.
Ex.P.38(a) : VAT returns filing
Ex.P.39 : Sales transaction sheet for
June-2017.
Ex.P.39(a) : VAT returns filing
Ex.P.40 : IT returns for the assessment
year 2017-18.
Witness examined on behalf of the accused:
DW-1 : Sri. Raghavendra DW-2 : Sri. K.B.Gopal JUDGMENT 26 CC.NO:23754/2017
Documents marked on behalf of the accused:
Ex.D.1 to Ex.D.11 : Various Form VAT 100 returns Ex.D.12 : Form No.152 Ex.D.13 and Ex.D.14 : Various Form VAT 100 returns Ex.D.15 to Ex.D.19 : Tax Invoices.
(NAGARAJEGOWDA.D) C/C. XII Addl. C.M.M., Bengaluru.
* Accused copy furnished.
JUDGMENT 27 CC.NO:23754/2017 05/09/2019 Complainant - NH Accused - BR Judgment
(Judgment pronounced in the open court vide separate order) ORDER Acting under Section 255(2) Cr.P.C the accused is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.18,49,800/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Forty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred only). The same shall be paid by the accused within a period of 30 days from the date of this order.
Out of the said fine amount, a sum of Rs.18,47,800/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakhs Forty Seven Thousand Eight Hundred only) has been awarded to the complainant as compensation under Section 357 of Cr.P.C. In default of JUDGMENT 28 CC.NO:23754/2017 payment of fine amount, the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for 2 (two) years.
The rest of Rs.2,000/- (Two Thousand Only) is adjusted towards the state as fine.
Supply a free copy of this Judgment to the accused.
(NAGARAJEGOWDA.D) C/C. XII Addl. C.M.M., Bengaluru.