JUDGMENT :

Jasjit Singh Bedi, J. (Oral)

1. The present revision petition has been filed impugning the judgment dated 05.11.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad whereby the appeal filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27/28.02.2008 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad has been dismissed.

2. The complaint in the present case came to be registered on 24.12.2005. The judgment of conviction was passed on 27/28.02.2008 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad. The instant revision was filed on 18.11.2009 and have come up for final hearing now i.e. after a period of 19 years from the date of filing of the complainant.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the accused in order to discharge his debut issued a cheque bearing No.186401 of UCO Bank, Branch Fatehabad for an amount of Rs.95,000/- on 30.6.2005 with the assurance that the cheque if presented to the bank, would be encashed. The cheque was signed by the accused. The complainant presented the cheque issued by the accused for encashment in his account with the SBI Branch, Fatehabad and the same was sent to the UCO Bank for clearance. UCO Bank, Fatehabad returned back the cheque alongwth a memo dated 21.11.2005 with the remarks that there were insufficient funds in the account of the accused. The State Bank of India sent the original cheque and the memo of the UCO Bank to the complainant by post on 21.11.2005. Thereafter, the complainant got issued a notice of demand through his counsel on 28.11.2005 vide registered post calling upon the accused to pay the amount of Rs.95,000/-within 15 days, but the accused failed to pay the amount in question leading to the filing of the complaint.

4. After recording and considering the preliminary evidence produced by the complainant, the Trial Court summoned the accused to face Trial. On appearance of the accused, he was served with a notice of accusation under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

5. In order to prove his case, complainant Poonam Chand himself appeared as PWI and tendered in evidence cheque Ex.C-1, Memos Ex.C2 and Ex.C3, legal notice Ex.C4, postal receipt Ex.C5 and acknowledgement due Ex.C6.

6. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.PC wherein he denied the allegations appearing against him in the evidence produced by the complainant and pleaded innocence.

7. Based on the evidence led, the accused came to be convicted and sentenced by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Fatehabad vide judgment and order of sentence dated 27/28.02.2008 as under:-

8. The accused/petitioner preferred an appeal which came to be dismissed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad vide judgment dated 05.11.2009.

9. The aforementioned judgments are under challenge in the present petition.

10. During the pendency of the instant revision, the sentence of the accused/petitioner was suspended vide order dated 23.12.2009.

11. The learned Counsel for the accused/petitioner contends that there is no evidence of any legally enforceable debt and the cheque in question has been given as a security cheque. The case of the complainant was based upon the memo issued by UCO Bank, Fatehabad by which it is shown that insufficient amount was available in the account of the accused but the memo which is Ex.C2 did not describe in which account cheque Ex.C-1 had been presented. The memo Ex.C2 also did not show the cheque number. Memo Ex.C2 only showed insufficient amount but no cheque number nor account number was shown in that memo. Further, none of the officials of concerned banks were examined by the complainant in his evidence. Therefore, no opportunity was provided to the accused to cross examine the bank employees. Complainant Poonam Chand had admitted in his evidence that he did not know who had written the body of the cheq