9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 546X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ready deposited and in case, if it is less than 50%, the deposit shall be completed to meet the quantum of 50% - Petition allowed. - Crl. R.P. Nos. 1083, 1084 and 1085/2015 - - - Dated:- 8-10-2021 - N. K. Sudhindrarao , J. For the Appellant : Manjunatha H. R. , Advocate For the Respondents : V. Srinivasan , Advocate ORDER These Criminal Revision Petitions are directed against the Judgment and order dated 09.09.2015 passed by the appellate court in respective Criminal Appeals, wherein the appeals came to be dismissed thereby confirming the judgment and order passed by the trial court in respective criminal cases. The details of the cases are mentioned in the following table:- Sl. No. Revision Petition before this Court Crl.A. No. filed by whom and result C.C. No. filed by whom, DD/ result / sentence imposed to the accused 1. 1083/2015 filed by Accused K.S. Ameer Jan 175/2015 -Filed by Accused K.S. Ameer Jan DD 09-09-2015 Appeal dismissed 4319/2008 Complainant Maqbul Ahmed DD 9-01-2015 Acting under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e close friends, the complainant has got good reputation in the public and also he is in good financial status. The accused taking undue advantage of the same, he has approached the complainant in the month of October 2007 for advancement of hand loan of ₹ 6,25,000/- to meet out his financial stringency, as his children are handicapped. Then the complainant believing on good faith, upon the accused, he had advanced the said loan amount of ₹ 6,25,000/- to the accused the same has been received by the said accused and at that time, out of the said loan amount to discharge the part of the loan amount, he had issued 3 cheques bg. No. 771682 dated 15-9-2007 for ₹ 1,00,000/-, cheque bg. No. 771681 dated 19-9-2007 for ₹ 1,00,000/- and cheque bg. No. 771684 dated 1-10-2007 for ₹ 25,000/- all the three cheques drawn on Canara Bank, BTM Layout Branch, Bangalore, totally of ₹ 2,25,000/- i.e. Exs. P1 to P3 as per the instructions given by the said accused for presentation of the aid cheques after the due date mentioned in the said disputed cheques Ex. P1 to P3. When the complainant presented the said three cheques in Indian Overseas Bank, Bommanahalli Branch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the complainant has got good reputation in the public and also he is in good financial status. The accused taking undue advantage of the same, he has approached the complainant in the month of October 2007 for advancement of hand loan of ₹ 6,25,000/- to meet out his financial stringency, as his children are handicapped. Then the complainant believing on good faith, upon the accused, he had advanced the said loan amount of ₹ 6,25,000/- to the accused the same has been received by the said accused and at that time, out of the said loan amount to discharge the part of the loan amount, he had issued cheque bg. No. 771638 dated 25-9-2007 for ₹ 1,00,000/- i.e., Ex. P1. As per the instructions given by the said accused for presentation of the said cheque after the due date mentioned in the said disputed cheque Ex. P1. When the complainant presented the said cheque in Indian Overseas Bank, Bommanahalli Branch, Bangalore, for encashment, the said cheque was dishonoured with an endorsement as 'funds insufficient' on 28-9-2007. Consequently, the complainant got issued legal notice to the accused on 26-10-2007 through RPAD and UCP. The notice sent through RPAD was re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced him. 8. Learned counsel further submits that the complainant and accused are partners with mutual trust and confidence prevailing on him, accused handed over the cheques for purchase of vehicle, but the complainant fabricated the same by writing his name on the cheque and mis used them and there is no liability. 9. Learned counsel for accused would further submit that revision petitions cannot be prosecuted because the main cases are adjudicating before the trial court. In this connection, learned counsel for complainant submitted that the revision petitions were dismissed for non-prosecution and later they were not prosecuted by the accused before the appellate court. 10. Learned counsel for complainant Mr. Srinivasan V submits that the cheques were issued in discharge of legally recoverable debt and he has proved all the aspects of drawing of cheques, issuance of cheques and payment of debt. He was accommodated with the cheques on different dates and learned trial judge and appellate judge have held the accused guilty of having committed the offence under Section 138 of NI Act. 11. Lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
