9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1075X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... now each other for merely 12 years. It is unacceptable that the person, who know each other for 12 years and was inspired her confidence, to lend the loan of ₹ 2,00,000/-, but without knowing his residential address. This Court finds that Courts below have erred in properly appreciating the defence explanation to rebut the presumption. Hence, this Criminal Revision Case is liable to be allowed - revision allowed. - Crl.R.C(MD)No.13 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 30-8-2018 - Dr. G. Jayachandran J. For the Petitioner : Mr. H. Velavadhas For the Respondent : No appearance ORDER This Criminal Revision case is filed against the judgment dated 03.08.2017 in Crl.A.No.25 of 2014 passed by the learned Additional District and Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er to discharge the said debt, he gave a cheque dated 18.12.2012. When the same was presented for collection, the cheque was returned with an endorsement insufficient fund . Again the cheque was represented on 15.02.2013 at State Bank of Travancore on 26.02.2013, which was returned for stop payment. After serving the statutory notice, complaint has been filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial Court after considering the evidence let in by the complainant and the accused and the documents marked on either side, had found the revision petitioner/accused guilty and sentenced him to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of ₹ 5,000/-, in default, to undergo one month simple imprisonment. The a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l address of the accused person. 6.In the said circumstances, the learned counsel vehemently argued that when the complainant herself has admitted that she has no wherewithal to lend ₹ 2,00,000/- and on previous occasion, she used to lend ₹ 1,000/- or ₹ 2,000/- as loan to the accused person and she has not explained under what circumstances she has lent ₹ 2,00,000/- to the accused. By preponderance of probability having rebut the presumption, the Court below ought to have accepted the explanation and acquitted the revision petitioner. 7.This Court, on perusing the deposition of P.W.2, finds force in the argument of the revision petitioner. The specific case of the respondent in her complaint is that she lent &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which was obtained under threat and the subject matter of the complaint dated 21.01.2013, is being utilised to prosecute the revision petitioner through the complainant/ Poongodi, who apparently not acquainted with the revision petitioner, except a tall claim that she and the revision petitioner know each other for merely 12 years. It is unacceptable that the person, who know each other for 12 years and was inspired her confidence, to lend the loan of ₹ 2,00,000/-, but without knowing his residential address. 9.On cumulative assessment of the evidence, this Court finds that Courts below have erred in properly appreciating the defence explanation to rebut the presumption. Hence, this Criminal Revision Case is liable to be allowed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
