ORDER :

H.B. Prabhakara Sastry, J.

1. Present revision petition is by the accused who was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as 'the N.I. Act'), by the learned II Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Hassan in C.C. No. 1131/2000 by its impugned Judgment of conviction and Order on sentence dated 16.10.2012. He preferred an appeal challenging his conviction, in Criminal Appeal No. 154/2012 in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge and the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court - I at Hassan (for brevity, 'Sessions Judge's Court') which Court by its impugned Judgment dated 19.03.2013 dismissed the appeal confirming the Judgment passed by the Trial Court in C.C. No. 1131/2000 dated 16.10.2012. Aggrieved by the same, the accused has preferred the present revision petition.

2. The present respondent has been the complainant in the Trial Court. The summary of the case of the complainant in the Trial Court is that the accused being known to him had availed a loan of Rs.18,000/- from him on 03.02.1996 to meet the expenses of his sister's marriage. Though he had agreed to repay the loan amount within eight months, but he did not repay the said loan. However, towards the repayment of the loan, he issued a cheque to the complainant, bearing No. 755481 dated 05.10.1996 drawn on State Bank of India, Hassan Branch. When the said cheque was presented by the complainant through his banker, the same came to be returned with the banker's endorsement "payment stopped by drawer". It was thereafter the complainant got issued a legal notice to the accused on 16.10.1996 demanding the payment of the cheque amount. Even after the said legal notice, the accused did not pay the cheque amount. Hence, the complainant was constrained to institute the complaint against him.

The accused appeared in the Trial Court and contested the matter. After recording the evidence led by both side and hearing the arguments, the Trial Court by its Judgment dated 16.10.2012 convicted the accused for the alleged offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and also to pay a fine of Rs.21,000/-. In default to make payment of the fine amount, the accused was ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. Out of the fine amount of Rs.21,000/-, a sum of Rs.18,000/- was directed to be paid to the complainant and remaining sum of Rs.3,000/- was directed to be paid to the State. Challenging the said Judgment of conviction and Order on sentence, the petitioner preferred Crl. A. No. 154/2012 in the Sessions Judge's Court which Court by its Judgment dated 19.03.2013, dismissed the appeal while confirming the Judgment of conviction and Order on sentence passed by the Trial Court. It is against the said Judgments of conviction and Order on sentence the accused has preferred the present revision petition.

3. In spite of service of notice upon the respondent, he has remained unrepresented.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner in his single sentence argument submitted that he would not challenge the impugned Judgment of conviction passed by the Trial Court which was affirmed by the Appellate Court, however, he would only request this Court to take a lenient view on the order on sentence. He further submits that the petitioner/accused is ready to pay the entire fine amount, but however, the sentence of imprisonment may be set aside. In his support, he relies upon a Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in METERS AND INSTRUMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER VS. KANCHAN MEHTA, reported in (2018) 1 SCC 560 and draws the attention of this Court to paragraph 11 of the said Judgment.

5. In view of the above submission, though the matter is listed for admission, it is heard for final disposal. Perused the materials placed before this Court including the impugned Judgment passed by both the Trial Court and Sessions Ju