Liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the presumption under Section 139 were crucial in establishing the accused's guilt.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 r/w. 401 of Criminal Procedure Code to call for the records relating to the judgment passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur in Crl.A.No.27/2019 dated 17.03.2021 dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment dated 30.01.2019 in C.C.No.136/2010 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruppur.)

1. Challenge in this revision is made to the judgement and orders passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur in C.A.No.27/2019 confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Udumalpet in C.C.No.136/2010.

2. The case of the complainant in a nutshell is as follows : The revision petitioner/accused borrowed a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- from the complainant on 05.11.2009 for her urgent family needs. She assured that she would repay the same within a month. In order to discharge the liability, the present revision petitioner/accused issued a cheque bearing No.693482 dated 09.12.2009 (Ex.P1) drawn on City Union Bank, Udumalpet Branch for a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- to the respondent/complainant. When the complainant presented the said cheque for collection through his banker, viz., the Indian Bank, Udumalpet Branch, the cheque was returned on 12.12.2009 (Ex.P2) with an endorsement "Funds Insufficient". Therefore, the respondent/complainant issued a legal notice dated 27.01.2010 (Ex.P4) directing the revision petitioner to make good the payment within a period of 15 days. Though the revision petitioner/accused received the said legal notice on 28.01.2010 as is seen from the postal acknowledgement card (Ex.P5), she did not come forward to pay the amount due under the cheque and did not also send any reply to the notice received by her.

3. Therefore, the complainant filed a private complaint before the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Udumalpet under Section 200 Cr.P.C. against the present revision petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (N.I. Act) in C.C.No.136/2010. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Udumalpet took cognizance of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (N.I. Act) and issued summons to the accused/revision petitioner and on her appearance, furnished copies of records under Section 207 Cr.P.C. When the revision petitioner/accused was questioned with regard to the substance of accusation made against her, she pleaded not guilty and the case was therefore posted for trial.

4. The complainant examined himself and marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P5. When the accused was questioned under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., with regard to the incriminating circumstances appearing in evidence against her, the accused denied of having committed any offence. She examined herself as DW1 and one another witness. However, no documentary evidence was adduced on her side. During the pendency of C.C.No.136/2010, the complainant died and therefore, his wife was impleaded as a legal heir of the complainant.

5. After analysing the evidence on record, the learned trial court judge found the accused guilty of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, convicted and sentenced her as detailed hereunder.

6. Aggrieved over the same, the revision petitioner/accused filed an appeal in C.A.No.27/2019 before the Principal Sessions Court, Tiruppur. The learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur after analysing the oral / documentary evidences adduced on both sides confirmed the judgement passed by the Trial Court Judge, as against which the present criminal revision is filed.

7. It is s