Since these revision applications involve common parties, identical facts, similar defences and argued by common Advocate, hence they are taken up together. The parties for the sake of clarity are referred to in their original capacity.

2. These revisions are directed against two separate judgments and orders dated 27-3-2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon, Nashik in Criminal Appeal Nos. 25 of 2006 and 16 of 1006 confirming conviction of the applicant -accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1888 ("N.I.Act" for short) recorded vide two separate judgments and orders both dated 28-6-2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Malegaon in Criminal Case No.173 of 2000 and Criminal Case No.174 of 2000 with slight modification so far as the imposition of fine of Rs.5,000/- is concerned.

The Factual Matrix :

3. The factual matrix reveal that the Respondent No.1- original complainant is running proprietary concerns under the name and style M/s Parekh Enterprises and M/s M.D.Process dealing in the business of processing and selling grey cloth.

4. The Respondent No.1 (complainant) has alleged that the accused used to be at Malegaon to purchase grey cloth from the shops of the complainant on credit in usual course of business. The complainant has maintained accounts of these business transactions in his books of accounts duly maintained in the regular course of business.

5. It is alleged that the applicant- accused during the course of regular business has purchased grey cloth on credit from the complainant. The accused in discharge of his liability, issued three cheques, detailed herein below:-

Sr. No. Date Cheque No. Amount Remark

1. 27-12-1999 618283 Rs.84,521/- All cheques

dishonoured

2. 27-12-1999 618276 Rs.91,231/- due to stop

payment

3. 27-12-1999 618277 Rs8,20,623/- instruction

All the above cheques were returned unpaid by bankers with cheque returned memos dated 12-1-2000.

6. The complainant issued statutory notices to the accused-applicants on 24-1-2000 and 25-1-2000 respectively, by Registered Post A.D. as well as under certificate of posting (U.P.C.) through his Advocate demanding the cheque amounts. The accused refused to accept R.P.A.D. notices. However, he received notices sent under certificate of posting. In spite of receipt of notices, the applicant-accused failed to repay the amount demanded. Hence two separate complaints were being filed under section 138 of N.I.Act.

7. The defence of the applicant- accused in the trial court was that the cheque book containing signed cheques was kept by him with his Munim, who lost it on 11.8.1999 as such he informed the bank on 12.8.1999. The Police reports were lodged on 9-2-2000 and 5-7-2000. In turn "stop payment" instructions were also issued to the banker with a request not to honour the subject cheques. The applicant/accused had further taken defence that there was no legally enforceable liability as such there was no question of issuing such cheques. Consequently, offence under Section 138 of NI Act could not be said to have been committed by the applicant-accused. He also challenged the service of notice.

8. All the above defences were negatived by both the Courts below. Both the Courts below concurrently held that cheques were given in discharge of legally enforceable liability payable to the complainant by the accused and that the accused deliberately and wilfully failed to honour subject cheques and thereby committed an act constituting an offence under Section 138 of NI Act. Both the Courts below further held that service of notice was legal and valid. There was no reply to the said notices. The complaints filed under Section 138 of N.I.Act were proved and established by the complainant.

9. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgments and orders passed by the Courts below, the present revision applications have been filed by the applicant/accused.

The Submissions :

10. The