Case Note & Summary
The applicant-accused was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by the learned 10th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot in Criminal Case No.13738 of 2016, sentenced to simple imprisonment of two years and fine of Rs.4,00,000/- (the cheque amount), with default simple imprisonment of six months. The conviction was upheld by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot in Criminal Appeal No.116 of 2018 vide order dated 16.03.2019. The accused then filed the present revision application under Sections 397 read with 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. During pendency of the revision, the applicant deposited the cheque amount. The court noted that the offence under Section 138 NI Act is quasi-criminal and compoundable, and punishment is not a means of retribution but to ensure payment and promote credibility of cheques. However, the court found no perversity in the concurrent findings of the trial court and appellate court, and held that it is not open for the revisional court to re-analyse and re-interpret evidence. Accordingly, the revision application was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Negotiable Instruments Act - Dishonour of Cheque - Section 138 - Revisional Jurisdiction - The revisional court cannot re-analyse and re-interpret evidence in revisional jurisdiction unless there is perversity. Deposit of cheque amount during pendency does not automatically warrant acquittal as the offence is quasi-criminal and compoundable, but the court found no ground to upset concurrent findings. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the revisional court should interfere with concurrent findings of conviction under Section 138 NI Act when the accused has deposited the cheque amount during pendency of revision.
Final Decision
The revision application is dismissed. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 11.04.2018 passed by the learned 10th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot in Criminal Case No.13738 of 2016, as confirmed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot in Criminal Appeal No.116 of 2018 vide order dated 16.03.2019, are upheld.
Law Points
- Section 138 NI Act is quasi-criminal and compoundable
- revisional court cannot re-analyse evidence
- deposit of cheque amount does not automatically warrant acquittal
Case Details
R/Criminal Revision Application (Against Conviction - Negotiable Instrument Act) No. 387 of 2019
Mr. Pratik Y. Jasani for the Applicant, Mr. Viral V. Dave for Respondent No.2, Ms. Shruti Pathak, APP for Respondent No.1
Ranjitsinh Manubha Jadeja
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal revision application against conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Remedy Sought
Quashing and setting aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 11.04.2018 passed by the learned 10th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot in Criminal Case No.13738 of 2016, and the appellate order dated 16.03.2019 passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot in Criminal Appeal No.116 of 2018.
Filing Reason
The applicant was convicted and sentenced for dishonour of cheque under Section 138 NI Act, and the appeal was dismissed.
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted and sentenced the applicant on 11.04.2018; appellate court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction on 16.03.2019.
Issues
Whether the revisional court should interfere with concurrent findings of conviction under Section 138 NI Act when the accused has deposited the cheque amount during pendency of revision.
Submissions/Arguments
The applicant deposited the cheque amount during pendency of the revision application.
The offence under Section 138 NI Act is quasi-criminal and compoundable, and punishment is not a means of retribution but to ensure payment.
No perversity found in concurrent findings; revisional court cannot re-analyse evidence.
Ratio Decidendi
In revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC, the court cannot re-analyse and re-interpret evidence unless there is perversity. Deposit of cheque amount does not automatically warrant acquittal as the offence is quasi-criminal and compoundable, but concurrent findings of fact cannot be disturbed in absence of perversity.
Judgment Excerpts
the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act is quasi-criminal in character and is compoundable and punishment under the NI Act is not a means of seeking retribution but is more a means to ensure payment of money and to promote credibility of cheques as a trustworthy substitute for cash payment.
In absence of any perversity and no ground is found to upset the concurrent findings of the learned trial Court and Appellate Court and it is not open for Revisional Court to re-analyse and re-interpret the evidence in revisional jurisdiction.
Procedural History
The trial court convicted the applicant on 11.04.2018. The applicant appealed to the Sessions Court, which dismissed the appeal on 16.03.2019. The applicant then filed the present revision application on an unspecified date, which was decided on 16.03.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: 138
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 397, 401
