Case Note & Summary
The present criminal revision petition was filed under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the concurrent findings of conviction recorded by the learned JMFC Court-II at Raichur in Criminal Case No.600/2007 and affirmed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge at Raichur in Criminal Appeal No.1/2014. The petitioner was the accused in a complaint filed by the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complainant alleged that the accused had issued a cheque for discharge of a legally enforceable debt, which was dishonoured upon presentation. The trial court convicted the accused, and the appellate court confirmed the conviction. In revision, the petitioner argued that the courts below had not properly appreciated the evidence and that the presumption under Section 139 of the Act stood rebutted. The High Court, after hearing both sides, held that the complainant had proved the execution of the cheque and the signature of the accused, thereby raising the presumption under Section 139 of the Act. The accused failed to rebut this presumption by adducing evidence of his financial capacity or any other probable defence. The court observed that the revisional court cannot reappreciate evidence unless there is a patent illegality or perversity in the findings. Since the concurrent findings were based on proper appreciation of evidence and were not perverse, the revision petition was dismissed. The court upheld the conviction and sentence imposed by the courts below.
Headnote
A) Negotiable Instruments Act - Dishonour of Cheque - Section 138 - Presumption under Section 139 - Rebuttal - The complainant proved the execution of the cheque and the signature of the accused, raising the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The accused failed to rebut the presumption by adducing evidence of financial capacity or other probable defence. Held that the concurrent findings of the courts below were based on proper appreciation of evidence and did not warrant interference in revision. (Paras 2-5)
B) Criminal Procedure Code - Revision - Section 397 - Scope - The revisional court cannot act as an appellate court and reappreciate evidence unless there is a patent illegality or perversity in the findings. Held that the concurrent findings of conviction were not perverse and did not call for interference. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the concurrent findings of conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, can be interfered with in revision under Section 397 of Cr.P.C., and whether the accused had rebutted the presumption under Section 139 of the Act.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the revision petition, upholding the concurrent findings of conviction and sentence imposed by the courts below.
Law Points
- Presumption under Section 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act
- 1881
- Rebuttal of presumption
- Concurrent findings
- Scope of revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C.
Case Details
2015 LawText (KAR) (08) 45
Criminal Revision Petition No.200048/2014
Ameet Kumar Deshpande (for petitioner), Ishwaraj S. Chowdapur (for respondent)
Shivaraj S/o Veerana Gouda
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal revision petition challenging concurrent findings of conviction under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner (accused) sought to set aside the judgment and order dated 02.07.2014 passed in Criminal Appeal No.1/2014 by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Raichur, confirming the judgment and order dated 18.12.2013 passed in Criminal Case No.600/2007 by the Prl. JMFC-II at Raichur.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, for dishonour of a cheque issued to the respondent.
Previous Decisions
The trial court (Prl. JMFC-II, Raichur) convicted the accused in Criminal Case No.600/2007 on 18.12.2013. The appellate court (II Addl. Sessions Judge, Raichur) confirmed the conviction in Criminal Appeal No.1/2014 on 02.07.2014.
Issues
Whether the concurrent findings of conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, can be interfered with in revision under Section 397 of Cr.P.C.
Whether the accused had rebutted the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the courts below had not properly appreciated the evidence and that the presumption under Section 139 of the Act stood rebutted.
The respondent supported the concurrent findings and argued that the revision petition lacked merit.
Ratio Decidendi
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, is in favour of the holder of the cheque. Once the execution of the cheque and the signature of the accused are proved, the burden shifts to the accused to rebut the presumption. The accused failed to adduce evidence to rebut the presumption. The revisional court cannot reappreciate evidence unless there is a patent illegality or perversity in the findings. The concurrent findings were based on proper appreciation of evidence and were not perverse.
Judgment Excerpts
The present petition is filed under Section 397 of Cr.P.C., challenging the concurrent finding given by the learned JMC Court-II at Raichur in Criminal Case No.600/2007 and affirmation of the same by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge at Raichur in Criminal Appeal No.1/2014.
The petitioner was the accused in Criminal Case No.600/2007 in the case initiated by the respondent herein for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Procedural History
The respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, against the petitioner in Criminal Case No.600/2007 before the Prl. JMFC-II, Raichur. The trial court convicted the accused on 18.12.2013. The accused appealed to the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Raichur, in Criminal Appeal No.1/2014, which was dismissed on 02.07.2014, confirming the conviction. The accused then filed the present revision petition under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. before the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench.
Acts & Sections
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: 138, 139
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 397
