Madras High Court
B.Govindan vs H.R.Anandan on 16 October, 2014
Author: C.T.Selvam
Bench: C.T.Selvam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 16.10.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM Crl.R.C.No.149 of 2014 B.Govindan Petitioner vs. H.R.Anandan Respondent Criminal Revision filed under section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for records in C.A.No.8 of 2012 on the file of learned Sessions Judge II, Kancheepuram, which confirms the judgment of learned Judicial Magistrate I, Kancheepuram , dated 29.02.2012 passed in C.C.No.394 of 2010 and set aside the judgment dated 24.01.2014 passed in C.A.No.8 of 2012 on the of learned Sessions Judge II, Kancheepuram. No Appearance O R D E R
This revision is preferred against two concurrent judgments of the Courts below convicting the petitioner for offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentencing the petitioner to undergo three months S.I. and to pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- in default three months S.I.
2. The petitioner faced trial for offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in C.C. No.394/2010 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate I, Kancheepuram. The complainant and the accused are close friends having business transactions and during such business transaction, the accused borrowed Rs.1,00,000/- from him and towards discharge of the same he had issued two cheques for Rs.50,000/- each. On presentation of the cheques and return thereof unpaid, the complainant caused statutory notice, followed the procedure envisaged under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and preferred the complaint.
3. Before the trial Court, the prosecution examined one witness and eight exhibits were marked. On behalf of the defence, two witnesses were examined and four exhibits were marked.
4. On appreciation of materials before it, the trial Court rendered a finding of conviction and sentenced the petitioner to undergo three months S.I. and to pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- in default three months S.I. There against, the petitioner has filed C.A.No.8 of 2012 before learned Sessions Judge, II, Kancheepuram, which came to be dismissed under judgment dated 24.01.2014. Against such finding, the present revision has been filed.
5. No representation on either side.
6. This Court finds no error in the factual findings of the Courts below. Present is a case of admitted business dealings between the petitioner and the complainant. Alleging that the cheques giving rise to the action under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act had been lost by his father, the petitioner caused publication and gave stop payment instructions to his banker. While so, the petitioner has caused a notice to the complainant on 20.05.2010 asking him to return the cheques. There is no explanation as to how the petitioner came to know that the cheques were in the hands of the defacto complainant.
6. Given the attendant facts and circumstances, this Court finds no error in the judgments under challenge.
7. This Criminal Revision shall stand dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
16.10.2014.
C.T.SELVAM, J.
kpr to
1. The learned Sessions Judge II, Kancheepuram
2.The learned Judicial Magistrate I, Kancheepuram Crl.R.C.No.149 of 2014 16.10.2014.