The central legal point established in the judgment is the burden of the accused to rebut the complainant's evidence in cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, emphasizing the importance of documentary evidence, acknowledgment of receipt, and consistent statements.

JUDGMENT

H.P. Sandesh, J. - This revision petition is filed challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 27.12.2018 passed in C.C.No.7965/2007 by the Trial Court and also the confirmation order dated 11.11.2019 passed in Crl.a.No.226/2019 by the appellate Court for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments act.

2. The factual matrix of the case is that the complainant in the complaint has contended that these revision petitioners in discharge of the debt, issued cheque bearing No.515300 dated 05.01.2007 drawn on Vijaya Bank, N.R.Road, Bengaluru, for a sum of Rs.38,50,000/-. When the said cheque was presented for encashment on 05.01.2007, the same was dishonoured on the ground of 'insufficient funds.' On receipt of the intimation, legal notice was given to the revision petitioners and he did not comply with the demand and hence complaint was filed by the complainant and the Trial Court after taking the cognizance, examined the complainant as P.W.1 and the other witness as P.W.2 and got marked the documents at Exs.P.1 to 83. On the other hand, the revision petitioner is also examined as D.W.1 and examined other four witnesses as D.W.2 to D.W.5 and got marked the documents at Exs.D.1 to 12. The Commissioner's report is marked as Ex.C.1. The Trial Court after considering both oral and documentary evidence placed on record, including Ex.C.1, sentenced the accused to pay an amount of Rs.38,55,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

3. Being aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the petitioners preferred an appeal and the appellate Court on re-appreciation of the material on record, dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence. Hence, the present revision petition is filed before this Court.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners would mainly contend that both the judgment of conviction and sentence and also confirmation suffers from legality and correctness and the Courts below failed to appreciate the fact that the legal notice Ex.P.5 does not contain the details of financial transactions said to have been taken place between the complainant and the accused. The legal notice is very cryptic and vague in nature. The legal notices sent to the petitioners were not served and the notices were retuned unserved with an endorsement that addressee left and no such address. Inspite of Ex.D.11 is produced, both the Courts have committed an error in not considering the same. It is also contended that on few occasions, the accused had filed the complaint against the complainant and his henchmen, as a result of which the complainant was summoned to the police station for investigation and in the said investigation, the complainant has volunteered few statements. In all such statements, the complainant was inconsistent about the money he has lent to the accused. The above fact is evident from Exs.P.50 to 52. Despite such a glaring infirmity with respect to the claim of the complainant, the Trial Court and the appellate Court have failed to appreciate the said evidence. The main contention of the petitioners is that he has availed the loan of Rs.5 lakhs by issuing blank signed cheques, signed blank promissory notes, signed blank bond papers and signed white sheets as security and the said defence was not accepted by both the Courts.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the Trial Court failed to take note of the earlier legal notice dated 23.01.2016. The documents Exs.D.4 to 7, altogether speaks in different tone and inspite of it, Ex.P.5 legal notice is accepted by the respective Courts. Ex.P.49 is said to be the document executed in favour of Mrs. Rekha. The said person has not been examined to prove his case. Ex.P.21 is also the document of pronote consideration receipt executed in the name of Rekha. These documents shows that an amount of Rs.3 lakhs was given to the acc