2006 (9) TMI 622 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues involved:
The admission regarding the purpose of the issued cheque and its implications under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

Issue 1: Admission of cheque as security

The case involves a revision petition challenging a guilty verdict, conviction, and sentence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The petitioner claimed that the cheque was issued as security for a loan repayment, not to the complainant but to her deceased husband. The courts below found the complainant established all elements of the offense. The petitioner contended that the cheque was issued only as security, not for a legally enforceable debt. However, the court held that the cheque was indeed issued for the discharge of a liability, as indicated in the notice of demand. The court emphasized that the crucial factor was whether the cheque was delivered to the complainant by the petitioner.

Issue 2: Existence of transaction and liability

The petitioner argued that there was no transaction with the complainant, and the real transaction was with her husband. However, the evidence presented by the complainant, including the cheque bearing the petitioner's signature, contradicted this claim. The petitioner's defense of handing over the cheque to the complainant's husband and subsequent discharge of the liability lacked credibility. The court noted the absence of any acknowledgment or voucher for the alleged payment, casting doubt on the petitioner's version. The court found the petitioner failed to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act, and the defense of discharge through another witness was deemed unreliable and unconvincing.

Sentencing and leniency

The petitioner sought leniency in sentencing, which the court considered based on established principles. While showing leniency, the court emphasized the importance of ensuring just compensation for the victim who had endured a prolonged legal battle. The court modified the sentence, reducing it to imprisonment till rising of court and ordering the petitioner to pay compensation. The petitioner was directed to appear before the Magistrate for the modified sentence by a specified date. Failure to comply would result in the execution of the modified sentence.

This summary highlights the key issues of the judgment, including the interpretation of the purpose of the issued cheque, the credibility of the transaction and liability claims, and the considerations for sentencing and compensation.