JUDGMENT :

1. This revision petition, under Sections 401/397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is directed against the judgment and order dated 23.03.2020, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Yupia, Papum Pare (A.P.) in Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 2019. It is to be noted here that vide impugned order, the learned Court below has upheld the judgment and order, dated 30.10.2019, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia, Papum Pare, convicting the petitioner under section 138 N.I. Act and sentencing him to pay a sum of Rs. 11,00,000, being the compensation, within three months and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months, in C.R. Case No. 71/2016.

2. The factual background, leading to filing of the present petition, is briefly stated as under:

“The petitioner, Shri Kanya Doke, had approached the respondent- Shri Tongom Jamoh for a sum of Rs. 13,00,000/ (Rupees Thirteen Lacs) only as loan and the respondent has given the same from Tongam Jamoh Mutual Fund on the condition that the petitioner shall repay the loan amount with 10% interest, within three months. But the petitioner had failed to repay the loan amount within stipulated time. Thereafter, on repeated request the petitioner had issued two post dated cheques to the respondent and one of the cheque, bearing No. 055929, dated 11.08.2016 was for an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/, drawn on Bank of Maharastra. The respondent then presented the said cheque for encashment with his banker- Punjab National Bank, at Ganga Branch, Itanagar, on 12.08.2016, but the same returned unpaid with an endorsement “Insufficient Fund.” Then on 13.08.2016, the respondent issued demand notice to the petitioner asking him to pay the cheque amount within 15 days from the date of receipt of the same. But, the petitioner had failed to make payment of the demanded amount. Then being left with no other option the respondent had filed one case, being complaint case No. 71/2016, under section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act case, before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia. The petitioner had contested the same. Then after hearing both side the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate had found that the respondent had succeeded in establishing the case against the petitioner and accordingly convicted the petitioner under section 138 N.I. Act and sentenced him to pay a sum of Rs. 11,00,000/-, being the compensation within three months, and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months, vide judgment and order dated 30.10.2019. Being highly aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 30.10.2019, of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia, the petitioner had preferred an appeal, being Criminal Appeal No. 12/2019, before the court of learned Sessions Judge, Yupia. But the same also came to be dismissed on 30.10.2020.”

3. Being highly aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred this revision petition and contended to set aside the conviction and sentence of the petitioner, on the following grounds:-

(i) That, the learned court below had failed to appreciate the evidence on the record as well as the points of law while arriving at the finding of guilt of the petitioner under section 138 N.I. Act;

(ii) That, the learned court below had failed to appreciate the fact that there was no legally enforceable debt on the part of the petitioner and the cheque in question was issued as security;

(iii) That, the respondent had failed to establish his authority to represent the ‘Tongom Jamoh Mutual Fund’ in respect of whom the money receipt dated 13.02.2014 was executed by the petitioner;

(iv) That, ‘Tongom Jamoh Mutual Fund’, being an unregistered organisation with that of Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), and had no authority to advance loan and as such cannot charge interest on loan and the respondent has no authority to represent it;

(v) That, there is no mention of the cheque No. 055929 being handed over by the petitioner as security to the alleged loan taken by the petitioner