The court upheld the conviction for cheating and forgery, affirming that the prosecution established guilt based on the dishonoured cheque evidence.

CAV ORDER

In this petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C petitioner who is accused No.1 has challenged his conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court for the offence punishable under Sections 420 , 467 , 471 of IPC which came to be confirmed by the Sessions Court by dismissing the appeal filed by him.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to by their ranks before the trial Court.

3. Respondent No.2 - Defacto complainant K Raghu filed a complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C, alleging that on 07.05.2012, accused No.1 borrowed hand loan of ₹20,000/- with a promise to repay the same within one month. He issued a cheque dated 07.06.2012 towards repayment of the same. When complainant present it for encashment, it was returned with endorsement "there is no sufficient funds" in the account and that the signature in the cheque does not tally with the specimen signature of account holder. In this regard, complainant made several request to the accused No.1 to pay the amount. Ultimately, on 05.01.2016, when he went to the house of accused No.1 to make demand, all the accused persons abused him in filthy language and gave threat to him and accused No.1 said that with the intention of cheating him, he has issued the cheque belonging to his wife by affixing his signature and since the validity period of the cheque has elapsed, the complainant was left without remedy. He was also manhandled and removed from the house. Though he approached Vidyaranyapuram police station to file complaint but it was not accepted. Police Commissioner also failed to take action upon the complaint. Threfore, without any alternative, he is forced to file the private complaint.

4. The trial Court referred this complaint to the jurisdictional police for investigation. The concerned police after conducting detailed investigation filed charge sheet against accused Nos.1 to 3.

5. Accused persons contested the case, by pleading not guilty to the charges framed by the trial Court.

6. In order to prove the allegations against accused, the prosecution has relied upon the evidence of PWs-1 to 7 and Exs.P1 to 14.

7. During the course of statement under Section 313, of Cr.P.C, accused have denied the incriminating evidence led by the prosecution.

8. On behalf of accused persons, accused No.2 is examined as DW1 and Ex.D1 is marked.

9. The trial Court the acquitted accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 504 and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC . It convicted accused No.1 for the offences punishable under Sections 420 , 467 and 471 of IPC and sentenced him as detailed in the order.

10. Aggrieved by the same, accused No.1 filed Criminal Appeal No.30/2020 before the Sessions Court. It came to be dismissed and thereby confirming the conviction and sentence of accused No.1.

11. Challenging both Judgments and orders of the trial Court as well as the Sessions Court, accused No.1 is before this Court contending that they are arbitrary, capricious and opposed to the principles of law. While considering the evidence on record, the trial Court has brushed aside, the inconsistencies, contradictions and omissions. The conviction of accused No.1 is against the weight of the evidence on record. The trial Court has relied upon the sole testimony of PW1 and drawn a conclusion that accused No.1 has fraudulently or dishonestly induced defacto complainant to pay him a sum of ₹20,000/- and thereby guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 467 and 471 of IPC .

12. Ex.P3 is addressed to State bank of India and as admitted by PW1 only cheq