Revision petitioner-accused being aggrieved by the

judgment on the file of I Additional District and Sessions

Judge, Ballari (hereinafter referred as ‘First Appellate

Court’ for brevity) in Criminal Appeal No.26/2015, dated

08.02.2021, preferred the present Criminal Revision

Petition.

2.

Parties to the revision petition are referred with

their ranks as assigned in the trial Court for the sake of

convenience.

3.

The factual matrix leading to the case of

prosecution can be stated in nutshell to the effect that

complainant and accused are well known to each other. In

the month of March-2009, accused approached the

complainant for financial assistance of Rs.1,50,000/- for

the purpose of his business. The complainant gave money

- 3 -

of Rs.1,50,000/- to accused who assured to return the

same within 15 days. Thereafter, complainant demanded

payment of money from the accused and payment was

postponed on one or the other pretext. Accused in order to

discharge legally enforceable debt issued cheque bearing

No.0952765

drawn

on

State

Bank

of

Mysuru,

Hagaribommanahalli

branch,

dated

01.03.2010

for

Rs.1,50,000/-. Complainant presented the said cheque

and the same was dishonored as insufficient funds and

drawers signature differs vide bank endorsement dated

08.03.2010. The complainant issued demand notice on

18.03.2010 and the same is duly served to the accused on

29.03.2010. Accused gave reply dated 30.03.2010.

Accused has not paid the amount as called upon in the

demand notice. Therefore, complaint came to be filed on

27.04.2010 for taking appropriate legal action against

accused.

4.

In response to the summons, accused has

appeared before the trial Court through the counsel and

contested the matter. The trial Court after being prima-

- 4 -

facie satisfied framed the accusation against accused and

accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5.

Complainant to prove his case relied on the

evidence of PW.1 and documents Exs.P.1 to 8. On closure

of the prosecution evidence, statement of accused under

Section 313 of Cr.P.C, came to be recorded. Accused

denied all the incriminating material evidence appearing

against him and placed rebuttal evidence in the form of

oral evidence of DWs.1 and 2 and the documents at

Exs.D.1 to D.6. The Trial Court after appreciating the

evidence on record has convicted the accused for the

offences punishable under Sections 138 of N.I.Act and

imposed sentence as per order of sentence.

6.

The said judgment of conviction and order of

sentence was challenged by accused before First Appellate

Court on the file of learned I Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Ballari in Criminal Appeal No.26/2015,

dated 08.02.2021. The First Appellate Court on re-

appreciating

the

material

evidence

on

record

has

- 5 -

dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment of

conviction and order of sentence passed by trial Court.

7.

The revision petitioner-accused challenging the

concurrent findings of both the Courts below contending

that both the Courts below have not properly appreciated

the evidence on record more particularly rebuttal evidence

placed on record by accused in the form of evidence of

DWs.1 and 2 and the documents at Ex.D.1 to D.6. The

Courts below have committed serious error in holding that

the cheque-Ex.P.1 is issued for lawful discharge of debt in

spite of specific denial about signature of accused on

cheque-Ex.P.1. The evidence of DW.2-Bank Manager and

the documents at Exs.D.2 to D5 previous cheques issued

by the accused have been conveniently ignored by both

the Court below and proceeded to record finding on the

basis of statutory presumption available in favour of

complainant. The approach and appreciation of evidence

by both the Courts below are contrary to law and evidence

on record. Therefore, prayed for allowing the revision

petition and to set-aside the judgment of both the Courts

- 6 -

below. Consequently, to acquit the accused from the

accusation leveled against him.

8.

Heard the a