JUDGMENT

K.S.Mudagal, J. - Whether the impugned order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and confirmed by the First Appellate Court suffer any illegality, impropriety or incorrectness? is the question involved in this case.

2. The petitioner was the accused and respondent was the complainant in C.C.No.1393/2012. For the purpose of convenience, the parties will be referred to henceforth with their ranks before the Trial Court.

3. The complainant presented the cheque Ex.P1 dated 31.12.2009 for a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- drawn on Canara Bank, Main Branch, Madikeri for realization. The Bank returned the cheque as per the memo Ex.P2 dated 02.06.2010 with an endorsement funds insufficient , payment stopped by drawer .

4. The complainant issued notice as per Ex.P3 dated 15.06.2010 to the accused claiming that the accused in all borrowed loan of Rs.4,40,000/- from him on 04.05.2009 and out of that he repaid only Rs.1,90,000/- on 25.10.2009. He further claimed in Ex.P3 that towards discharge of remaining liability of Rs.2,50,000/- the accused issued the cheque - Ex.P1 without a