Present:

Mr. Justice Md. Shohrowardi

Criminal Revision No. 1908 of 2023 Tanjina

...Convict-petitioner -Versus-

The State and another

...Opposite parties

Mr. Ehsanul Hoque, Advocate

...For the convict-petitioner

Mr. Shahin Alam, Advocate

...For the complainant-opposite party No. 2 Heard on 06.11.2024 and 21.11.2024

Judgment delivered on 26.11.2024

On an application filed under Section 439 read with Section 435 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 Rule was issued calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why the impugned judgment and order dated 23.02.2023 passed by Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Court No. 11, Dhaka in Criminal Appeal No. 977 of 2022 affirming the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 10.03.2015 passed by Joint Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Dhaka in Metropolitan Sessions Case No. 4254 of 2014 arising out of C.R. Case No. 661 of 2013 convicting the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentencing her to suffer imprisonment for 1(one) year and fine of Tk. 10,00,000 should not be set aside and/or such other or further order or orders passed as to this Court may seem fit and proper.

The prosecution case, in short, is that the complaint Md. Billal Hossain is the proprietor of S.M. Auto Centre, Ramna, Dhaka. The accused Tanjina issued Cheque No. 0153400 dated 16.09.2013 in favour of S.M. Auto Centre for payment of Tk. 10,00,000 drawn on her account maintained with Eastern Bank Limited, Dilkusha, Commercial Area, Dhaka. The complainant presented the cheque on 08.10.2013 which was dishonoured on the same date with the remark ‘insufficient funds’. He sent a legal notice on 10.10.2013 to the accused and he did not pay the cheque amount after receipt of the said notice. Thereafter, he filed the complaint petition on 03.12.2013.

After filing the complainant petition the complainant was examined under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 and the learned Magistrate was pleased to take cognizance of the offence against the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Subsequently, the case was sent to the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Dhaka who sent the case to the Joint Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Dhaka for trial and disposal.

During trial, the charge was framed against the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 which was read over to the accused and she pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried following the law. The prosecution examined 1 P.W. to prove the charge against the accused. The accused was absconding during the trial for which he was not examined under Section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.

After concluding the trial, the Joint Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Dhaka by judgment and order dated 10.03.2015 was pleased to convict the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for 1(one) year and a fine of Tk. 10,00,000 against which the accused Tanjina filed Criminal Appeal No. 977 of 2022 in the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Dhaka. The appeal was heard by Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Court No. 11, Dhaka who by impugned judgment and order affirmed the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court against which the convict-petitioner obtained the Rule.

P.W. 1 Md. Billal Hossain is the complainant. He stated that the accused Tanjina issued a cheque on 16.09.2013 for payment of Tk. 10,00,000. After presenting the cheque it was dishonoured on 08.10.2013 with the remark ‘insufficient funds’. On 10.10.2013 he sent the legal notice and filed the case on 03.12.2013. He proved the Cheque No. 0153400 dated 16.09.2013 as exhibit 1, dishonour slip as exhibit 2, legal notice, postal receipt and AD as exhibit 3 series. He proved the complain