The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of giving a reasonable opportunity to the accused to present his case, as mandated by the principle of audi alteram partem. The court also emphasized the implications of Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in meeting the ends of justice.

JUDGMENT :

B.A. Patil, J.

This petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused challenging the judgment and order, dated 15.07.2017, passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, in Crl.A. No.42/2017 whereby the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, dated 04.02.2017, passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class II, Belagavi, in C.C.C. No.64/2016 was confirmed and the appeal was dismissed.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The gist of the complaint is that the complainant is having in money transactions. The complainant is a registered company. The accused is the member of the said chit fund company and he being the highest bidder in action No.18, he bid for Rs.10,50,000/-. The complainant paid the price amount to the accused through cheque. The accuse being the beneficiary of the chit amount failed to make payment of installment Nos.14 to 25 to the tune ofRs.7,96,076/-. On repeated requests, the accused issued a cheque bearing No.612349, dated 03.11.2015, drawn on HDFC Bank. When the said cheque was presented for encashment, the same was returned with an endorsement "Funds insufficient", with a memo dated 05.11.2017. Thereafter, the complainant issued a legal notice and it was served on the accused on 03.12.2015. However, no reply was given by the accused and a complaint was registered for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

4. The Trial Court, after considering the material on record, convicted the accused. Being aggrieved, the petitioner/accused preferred an appeal before the District and Sessions Court and the District Court confirmed the said order of the Trial Court.

5. The only contention that has been taken up by the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused is that the accused has not been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. It is his further submission that the complainant was likely to settle the matter, he persuaded for settlement and, as such, the accused did not seriously contest the matter and did not cross-examine the complainant nor led any evidence, but the Trial Court, ultimately, without giving any opportunity has passed the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. It is his further submission that even the first Appellate Court did not heed to the said request of an opportunity being granted to the petitioner/accused and passed the order erroneously. It is his further submission that in order to give a fair opportunity that the matter may be remanded back to the Trial Court by setting aside the impugned judgments and the Orders of the Trial Court as well as the first Appellate Court.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-complainant vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner/accused has been given full opportunity and has not made use of the same. It is his further submission that the accused has deliberately not cross-examined the complainant and has not led any evidence; the petitioner/accused is lethargic and has not shown any interest in the prosecuting the case and under such circumstances, the petitioner/accused is not entitled for any leniency. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

7. I have carefully and cautiously considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material.

8. Though several contentions have been raised, I feel that if those contentions are considered and answered on the merits of the case, it would prejudice both the parties before the Court below. The main contention which has been taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused is that the petitioner has not been given adequate opportunity to cross-examine the complainant and to lead his evidence; that there are fair chances of success in this case. It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the complainant persuaded the accused that the matter would be settled and in