Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s. Pradhan Mercantile Pvt. Ltd., filed a complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. against the respondents, M/s. Virgin Apparels and its proprietor Amit Kumungo, for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, in C.C.No.25334/2010 before the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore. The trial court convicted the accused and sentenced accused No.2 to pay a fine of Rs.66,49,881/- with default simple imprisonment. The accused appealed in Criminal Appeal No.103/2013 before the LII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, which was dismissed on 02-09-2013. The complainant then filed this criminal revision petition under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. seeking to set aside the appellate judgment and confirm the trial court's judgment. The High Court heard the matter through physical/video conferencing and reserved judgment on 30-11-2022. The court examined the evidence and found that the complainant had proved the issuance of the cheque and its dishonour. The accused failed to rebut the presumption under Section 139 NI Act that the cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt. The court held that the concurrent findings of the courts below were correct and dismissed the revision petition.
Headnote
A) Negotiable Instruments Act - Dishonour of Cheque - Section 138 - Legally Enforceable Debt - The complainant proved that the cheque was issued towards repayment of a loan advanced to the accused. The accused failed to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act that the cheque was issued for discharge of a legally enforceable debt. Held that the conviction was proper (Paras 2-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was correct and sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the criminal revision petition, upholding the conviction and sentence passed by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court.
Law Points
- Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act
- 1881
- presumption under Section 139 NI Act
- legally enforceable debt
- rebuttal of presumption
- standard of proof in criminal revision
Case Details
2022 LawText (KAR) (11) 68
Criminal Revision Petition No.773 of 2013
Dr. Justice H.B. Prabhakara Sastry
Sri. T.V. Vijay Raghavan for petitioner, Smt. Geetha Menon for respondents
M/s. Pradhan Mercantile Pvt. Ltd.
M/s. Virgin Apparels and Mr. Amit Kumungo
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal revision petition against conviction for dishonour of cheque under Section 138 NI Act.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to set aside the appellate judgment and confirm the trial court's conviction and sentence.
Filing Reason
The petitioner/complainant was aggrieved by the appellate court's dismissal of the appeal against conviction.
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted accused on 01-02-2013; appellate court dismissed appeal on 02-09-2013.
Issues
Whether the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was correct and sustainable in law.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the trial court and appellate court correctly convicted the accused.
Respondents argued that the conviction was not sustainable.
Ratio Decidendi
The complainant proved the issuance of the cheque and its dishonour. The accused failed to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act that the cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt. Therefore, the conviction under Section 138 NI Act was proper.
Judgment Excerpts
The present petitioner, as a complainant had filed a complaint under Section 200 of the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ... for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
After holding a trial ... the learned Magistrate ... convicted the accused No.1 and accused No.2 ... for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced the accused No.2 to pay a fine of ` 66,49,881/-.
Procedural History
Complaint filed in C.C.No.25334/2010 before XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore. Trial court convicted accused on 01-02-2013. Accused appealed in Criminal Appeal No.103/2013 before LII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, which was dismissed on 02-09-2013. Complainant filed Criminal Revision Petition No.773/2013 before High Court of Karnataka, which was dismissed on 05-12-2022.
Acts & Sections
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: 138, 139
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 200, 397, 401
