JUDGMENT :

Manisha Batra, J.

The present revision petition has been filed against the judgment of conviction and order on quantum of sentence, both dated 29.11.2019, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ferozepur in criminal complaint bearing CIA No. NACT/1035/2016, titled as The Ferozepur Primary Co-operative Agriculture Development Bank vs. Kala, filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'N. I. Act'), whereby the petitioner was held guilty for commission of offence punishable under the aforesaid section and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,90,000/- as compensation to the complainant 5,000/-, in default of which, he was directed to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. The petitioner has also laid challenge to the judgment dated 18.05.2023, passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Fast Track Court, Ferozepur, whereby the appeal filed by him had been dismissed.

2. For the sake of coherence and convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their original nomenclature given before the learned trial Court.

3. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned complaint had been filed on the allegations that the accused had secured a loan for an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- as KCC loan from the complainant-Bank. The loan was to be repaid in installments along with interest. To discharge his liability towards repayment of the loan, the accused had issued a cheque for a sum of Rs.2,90,000/- on 15.10.2016. When presented before the banker of the complainant, the said cheque was dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds on 17.10.2016. Despite issuance of a registered legal notice dated 07.11.2016, the accused did not make payment of the cheque amount, thereby compelling the complainant to file the aforesaid complaint.

4. On the basis of the preliminary evidence produced on record before the learned trial Court, process under Section 138 of the N. I. Act was issued against the accused. He appeared before the learned trial Court and was served with notice of accusation. The complainant-Bank examined one witness, besides placing reliance on some documentary evidence and thereafter its evidence was closed.

5. The statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein he abjured his guilt and claimed to be innocent. The defence as set up by the accused was that he had not issued any cheque in favour of the complainant to discharge any liability and that the complainant had procured a blank signed cheque from him at the time of advancement of loan as security, which was misused by it. No defence evidence had been adduced.

6. After giving due deliberations to the contention as raised by both the sides and on appraising the entire evidence produced on record, the learned trial Court held the accused guilty under Section 138 of the N. I. Act and sentenced him in the manner as mentioned above. Apart from that, fine of Rs. 2,90,000/- was also imposed upon the accused, which was payable to the complainant as compensation. The accused filed appeal before the learned first appellate Court, which was dismissed, vide impugned judgment dated 18.05.2023.

7. It is argued by learned counsel for the accused-petitioner that the impugned judgments, passed by the learned trial Court as well as the learned first appellate Court, are not sustainable in the eyes of law and are liable to be set aside as the findings given therein are based on conjectures and surmises. The Courts concerned did not apply their judicious mind. Non-speaking orders had been passed. The fact that the cheque in question was a security cheque and was not issued by the accused to discharge any legally enforceable debt had not been taken into consideration. The accused had produced evidence to show that as on the date of lodging of the complaint, only an amount of