The courts affirmed that under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the initial presumption of liability must be rebutted by the accused with satisfactory evidence, which was not done in this case.

ORDER :

1. This Criminal Revision is filed to set aside the judgment dated 20.09.2019 passed in C.A.No.4 of 2018 on the file of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur modifying the order dated 30.11.2017 passed in S.T.C.No.252 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court, Magisterial level at Ambattur.

2. The brief facts, which are necessary for the disposal of this Criminal Revision, are as follows:-

2.1. As per the complaint filed by the Respondent/Complainant, the Complainant is engaged in the business of selling electronic goods in the name and style of M/s. Ragavendra Enterprises, having his showroom at No.41/52, K.K. Road, Venkatapuram, Ambattur, Chennai. According to the Complainant, the Revision Petitioner/Accused is his close friend for more than 15 years. It was stated that the Revision Petitioner/Accused is engaged in the contractual business with T.I. Cycles of India, Ambattur. During March 2011, the Revision Petitioner/Accused represented to the Complainant that the payment bills were not cleared by T.I. Cycles Company and for clearance of the bills, they are expecting gifts such as LCD Television, Air Conditioners etc., Therefore, the Revision Petitioner/Accused requested the Complainant to supply those items on credit basis. Accordingly, during May 2011, the Respondent/Complainant supplied those goods. Similar supplies were effected as and when requested by the Revision Petitioner/Accused until June 2012 to the total value of Rs.49,50,600/-. When the Complainant demanded payment, during October 2012, the Revision Petitioner/Accused stated that he will make the payment during November 2012. Accordingly, to discharge his liability, the Revision Petitioner/Accused issued two cheques dated 01.11.2012 for Rs.30,00,000/- and another cheque dated 26.11.2012 for Rs.19,50,600/- drawn on United Bank of India, Mount Road Branch. On 26.11.2012, when the Respondent/Complainant presented the cheques with his bankers Syndicate Bank, Ambattur, the same was returned unpaid with an endorsement “funds insufficient” and it was communicated to the Respondent/Complainant on 28.11.2012. Therefore, on 30.11.2012, the Respondent/Complainant sent a notice to the Revision Petitioner/Accused calling upon him to pay the cheque amount. On receipt of the notice, the Revision Petitioner/Accused issued a reply notice dated 13.12.2012 with false allegations. Therefore, the Respondent/Complainant had filed the complaint under Section 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

2.2. After receipt of the complaint, the Complainant/Respondent herein was examined on oath and his sworn statement was recorded. Thereafter, summons were issued to the Accused for his appearance. On appearance of the Accused, copies were furnished to him. When he was questioned, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Therefore, trial was ordered. During trial, the Respondent/Complainant examined himself as P.W- 1 and marked Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-8. On behalf of the Revision Petitioner/Accused no witness was examined, but eight documents were marked as Ex.D-1 to Ex.D-8.

2.3. On assessment of evidence, the Trial Court, by the Judgment dated 30.11.2017 concluded that the cheques were issued for a legally enforceable debt and liability by the Revision Petitioner/Accused. It was also held that the initial presumption raised by the Respondent/Complainant was not rebutted by the Revision Petitioner/Accused. Accordingly, the trial Court allowed the Complai