ORDER :

Prayer in Crl.R.C.No.1322 of 2017 : Criminal Revision filed under Sections 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying against the judgment passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate FTC II, Egmore, Chennai in C.C.No.1318 of 2013, dated 31.03.2015 against C.A.No.78 of 2015 by the VIth Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.

Prayer in Crl.R.C.No.1323 of 2017 : Criminal Revision filed under Sections 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying against the judgment dated 26.07.2017 in Crl.R.C.No.12 of 2016 on the file of the VIth Additional City Civil Page No.1 of 16 Court, Chennai, High Court Campus preferred this Memorandum of Criminal Revision thereby conforming the judgment dated 31.03.2015 passed in C.C.No.1318 of 2013 by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate Fast Track Court No.II, Egmore, Chennai.

These Criminal Revision cases have been filed against the common judgment and order passed by the VI Additional Sessions Judge in Crl.A.No.78 of 2015 and Crl.Rc.No.12 of 2016, dated 27.06.2017, wherein, the criminal appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed confirming the judgment and order passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (FTC) No.II, Egmore in C.C.No.1318 of 2013 and Crl.R.C.No.12 of 2016 was allowed and the sentence imposed against the 2nd petitioner was enhanced and the petitioner was directed to undergo imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay compensation of a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs only) to the respondent/complainant.

2. The respondent/complainant had a business transaction with the petitioners and based on purchase orders placed by the 1st petitioner, Coal was supplied by the respondent. Out of the total value of coal supplied, there was an outstanding balance amount and towards the said liability, the 1st petitioner issued three cheques each amounting to a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs ony) and in total for a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs only).

3. When the cheques were presented for collection by the respondent, the same was returned with an endorsement “Insufficient Funds”. A legal notice was issued by the respondent on 29.12.2012 calling upon the petitioners to pay the cheque amount, within a period of fifteen days. In spite of receipt of the legal notice, the petitioners neither paid the cheque amount nor gave any reply. Under such circumstances, the complaint came to be filed by the respondent against the petitioners for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The first petitioner is the Company and the second petitioner is the Managing Director of the Company.

4.The representative of the respondent Company examined himself as PW1 and Ex.P1 to Ex.P16 were marked. No one was examined on the side of the petitioners and two documents were marked as Ex.D1 and Ex.D2.

5.The Trial Court on considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on appreciation of evidence, came to a conclusion that the legal presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must lean in favour of the respondent and that the petitioners have failed to rebut the legal presumption and accordingly, convicted the petitioners for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Insofar the sentence is concerned, no sentence was imposed as against the first petitioner. Insofar as the second petitioner is concerned, he was directed to pay the sum of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs only) as compensation under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C., and in default to undergo one year simple imprisonment.

6.Aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court, the petitioners filed Crl.A.No.78 of 2015. The respondent was also aggrieved by the sentence imposed by the Trial Court and sought for the enhancement of sentence by filing Crl.R.C.No.12 of 2016. Both the appeal and revision were taken up together and a common judgment was passed by the VI Additional Sessions Judge on 27.06.2017. The Criminal Appeal filed by the petit