9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (6) TMI 1031 - HC - Indian LawsDishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - Section 138 of NI Act - HELD THAT - It is seen that both the courts below have rightly held that the second respondent/complainant has established the guilt of the revision petitioners/accused under Section 138 of the Act. The reasoning assigned by the courts below in support of its findings in favour of the second respondent/ complainant and against the revision petitioners/accused, is fully justified and there is no perversity or illegality. The courts below have rightly appreciated the evidence and materials and applied the legal aspects in proper perspective and in accordance with the settled legal position. There are no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of the Courts below with regard to the conviction and sentence. No interference is warranted in this regard. There is no merit in the revision and the same is liable to be dismissed. The criminal revision case is dismissed.
Issues:
1. Criminal revision filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment dated 22.03.2019. 2. Private complaint filed under Section 200 Cr.P.C. for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 3. Dishonour of cheque issued by the accused company. 4. Conviction and sentencing of the accused under Section 138 of the Act. 5. Appeal against the conviction dismissed by the appellate court. 6. Review of judgments by the High Court. Issue 1: Criminal Revision under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. The criminal revision case was filed against the judgment passed in Crl.A. No. 312 of 2016, where the II-Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment in C.C. No. 288 of 2013 for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Issue 2: Private Complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. The complainant filed a private complaint against the accused for the offence under Section 138 of the Act, alleging non-payment of dues for batteries supplied to the accused company. The accused issued a cheque that was dishonoured due to insufficient funds, leading to legal notices and subsequent court proceedings. Issue 3: Dishonour of Cheque The accused company issued a cheque in favour of the complainant for the amount owed, but it was dishonoured due to insufficient funds. Legal notices were sent to the accused, demanding payment within a specified period, which was not complied with, leading to the criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Act. Issue 4: Conviction and Sentencing The trial court found the accused guilty under Section 138 of the Act, sentencing them to undergo imprisonment, pay a fine, and compensate the complainant. The conviction was based on evidence of purchase orders, invoices, cheque issuance, and non-payment, establishing the liability of the accused. Issue 5: Appeal Dismissal The appellate court confirmed the conviction recorded by the trial court, addressing all contentions raised by the revision petitioners. The appellate court upheld the findings of the trial court, leading to the filing of the present revision before the High Court. Issue 6: High Court Review The High Court reviewed the judgments of the lower courts and found no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings. The High Court affirmed the guilt of the accused under Section 138 of the Act, upholding the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court. The revision was dismissed, and the judgments of the lower courts were upheld without any perceived perversity or illegality.
|
