P. G. AJITHKUMAR
Priyamvada K. , W/o. Radhakrishnan – Appellant
Versus
M. Rahufina, W/o. Abdul Nazar – Respondent
ORDER :
The petitioner, who stands convicted and sentenced for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (N.I.Act) has filed this revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code). The trial court convicted her and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.6 lakhs and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of four months. It was directed that the fine amount, if realised, should be paid to the 1st respondent-complainant as compensation. The Appellate Court confirmed the conviction and the sentence.
2. The 1st respondent filed the complaint with the following allegations: The 1st respondent had a chitty transaction with the petitioner. In relation to that Rs.6 lakhs was due to the 1st respondent and for the payment of that amount, the petitioner issued Ext.P1 cheque. When the said cheque was presented for encashment, it was returned unpaid. A demand notice was issued and on receipt of it, the appellant sent a reply. The amount due under the cheque was not repaid.
3. The petitioner appeared before the trial court on streceipt of summons and denied the accusation. The 1st responden
M/s Kalamani Tex and another v. P. Balasubramanian
Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh, 2023 (6) KHC 391 (SC)
Kundan Lal Rallaram v. Custodian, Evacuee Property, Bombay
A.N. Nadarajan v. K.G.Nadarajan
Dr. Jyothi Prasad Bhat v. K.Sundara Rajan and another
State of Kerala v. Puttumana Illath Jathavedan Namboodiri
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.