SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(Kar) 664

V.JAGANNATHAN
Veerayya – Appellant
Versus
G. K. Madivalar – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:N. Chandrashekarharayya, Advocate.
For the Respondent:B.V. Somapur, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

V. Jagannathan, J:

1. This Criminal Revision Petition is by the accused, who has been convicted by the Trial Court for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the said judgment and the consequent sentence of fine of Rs.2,00,000/- imposed being confirmed by the lower appellate Court by dismissing the petitioner’s appeal.

2. The facts of the case in short are that, the respondent filed a complaint alleging an offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act on the footing that the petitioner herein had borrowed a loan of Rs.2,00,000/- from the complainant and towards the discharge of the said loan amount, the petitioner had issued a cheque for Rs.2,00,000/- and the said cheque dated 22.8.2005, on presentation, was returned with the endorsement insufficient funds. After issuing notice to the petitioner and receiving no response, the complainant approached the Trial Court by way of a private complainant under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C.

3. Before the Trial Court, evidence was let in by the complainant by examining himself as P.W.1 and two more witnesses and producing four documents. No evidence was placed by the accused in his defence. The Trial Court, aft




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top