RATHNAKALA
D. Jerome Jay Kumar – Appellant
Versus
D. Phillip – Respondent
1. The judgment of conviction and sentence recorded by the XIV Addl. CMM., Bangalore, in a proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('the Act' for brevity) upheld by the lower appellate court is under attack in this revision petition.
2. Parties will be referred to as per their ranking before the Trial Court.
3. The complainant after issuance of statutory notice to the accused lodged a private complaint under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. before the jurisdictional court alleging offence under Section 138 of the Act against the (husband and wife) purchased immovable property/residential site in a revenue land; towards the part payment, issued a cheque dt.20.2.2009 for Rs.12 lakhs drawn on SBM Lingarajapuram Branch, Bengaluru and the cheque was presented by the complainant before his banker. It was returned with the endorsement "exceeds arrangement". The legal notice/demand notice sent through RPAD and UCP dt.26.8.2009 is served on the accused on 4.9.2009 but he failed to make payment of the cheque amount.
4. The accused was procured, his plea for the offence under Section 138 of the Act was recorded and he pleaded not guilty. Complainant led the evid
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.