Case Note & Summary
The case arises from a complaint filed by M/s. Meenakshi Developers (respondent/complainant) against Sri V.V. Chari (petitioner/accused) under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) alleging an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act). The complainant alleged that the accused had issued a cheque for repayment of a loan, which was dishonoured upon presentation. The trial court convicted the accused and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.2,05,000/- with default sentence. The accused appealed, and the Sessions Judge (FTC-VI) confirmed the conviction but reduced the fine to Rs.1,75,000/-, with a default sentence of six months simple imprisonment, and directed that Rs.1,70,000/- be paid as compensation to the complainant and Rs.5,000/- be confiscated to the Government. The accused then filed a criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 CrPC before the High Court of Karnataka challenging the legality and correctness of the appellate order. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the complainant had proved that the cheque was issued for discharge of a legally enforceable debt. The accused failed to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act. The court held that the concurrent findings of the courts below were based on proper appreciation of evidence and did not suffer from any perversity or illegality. The High Court dismissed the revision petition, upholding the conviction and the modified sentence.
Headnote
A) Negotiable Instruments Act - Dishonour of Cheque - Section 138 - Presumption under Section 139 - The complainant proved that the cheque was issued for discharge of a legally enforceable debt. The accused failed to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The conviction was upheld. (Paras 2-6)
B) Criminal Procedure Code - Revision - Section 397 read with Section 401 - The High Court in revision examined the legality and correctness of the concurrent findings of the courts below. No perversity or illegality was found to interfere with the conviction. (Para 1)
C) Negotiable Instruments Act - Sentence - Section 138 - The appellate court reduced the fine from Rs.2,05,000/- to Rs.1,75,000/- with default sentence of six months simple imprisonment. The High Court found no reason to interfere with the modified sentence. (Paras 1, 6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was sustainable and whether the sentence imposed was appropriate.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the criminal revision petition, upholding the conviction and the modified sentence of fine of Rs.1,75,000/- with default simple imprisonment of six months, and the direction to pay Rs.1,70,000/- as compensation to the complainant and confiscate Rs.5,000/- to the Government.
Law Points
- Presumption under Section 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act
- 1881
- Rebuttal of presumption
- Dishonour of cheque
- Section 138 NI Act
- Criminal revision under Section 397 CrPC
Case Details
2018 LawText (KAR) (08) 30
Criminal Revision Petition No.54/2011
Sri. Shyam Koundinya A.S. for petitioner, Sri. Jeevan K for respondent
M/s. Meenakshi Developers represented by its Proprietor Sr. R.S. Ranganath
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal revision petition against conviction under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Remedy Sought
Petitioner/accused sought to set aside the order of conviction and sentence passed by the appellate court and trial court
Filing Reason
Accused challenged the legality and correctness of the appellate order confirming conviction and modifying sentence
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted accused and sentenced to fine of Rs.2,05,000/-; appellate court confirmed conviction but reduced fine to Rs.1,75,000/- with default sentence and compensation
Issues
Whether the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was sustainable
Whether the sentence imposed was appropriate
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the order of conviction and sentence was illegal and incorrect
Respondent supported the concurrent findings of the courts below
Ratio Decidendi
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 that the cheque was issued for discharge of a legally enforceable debt stands unless rebutted by the accused. The accused failed to rebut this presumption, and the concurrent findings of the courts below were based on proper appreciation of evidence, warranting no interference in revision.
Judgment Excerpts
This revision petition is filed by the accused under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, calling in question the legality and correctness of the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (FTC-VI), dated 13.12.2010 passed in Criminal Appeal No.1039/2007, whereby the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Magistrate, Bengaluru City, dated 18.01.2006 in C.C.No.29704/2002 is confirmed modifying the sentence to pay fine of Rs.1,75,000/- instead of Rs.2,05,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and out of the fine amount awarding compensation of Rs.1,70,000/- to the complainant and to confiscate Rs.5,000/- to the Government.
The respondent/complainant filed complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure alleging that the accused has committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Procedural History
The complainant filed a complaint under Section 200 CrPC in C.C.No.29704/2002 before the XVIII ACMM & XX ASCJ, Bengaluru, which resulted in conviction and sentence on 18.01.2006. The accused appealed in Criminal Appeal No.1039/2007 before the Sessions Judge (FTC-VI), Bengaluru, who confirmed conviction but modified sentence on 13.12.2010. The accused then filed Criminal Revision Petition No.54/2011 before the High Court of Karnataka, which was dismissed on 21.08.2018.
Acts & Sections
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: 138, 139
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 200, 397, 401
