Back
BENCH AT DHARWAD
M NAGARAJ S/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA – Appellant
Versus
A. ANJINI S/O A RAMAPPA – Respondent
Key Points: - The court discusses the acquittal/conviction under Section 138 NI Act and the role of signature discrepancy in Ex.P.1 (!) (!) (!) . - It analyzes the burden of proof and the statutory presumption under Sections 118 and 139 NI Act and the impact of rebuttal evidence (DWs and Exs.D.1-D.6) (!) (!) (!) - (!) . - It considers service of demand notice and proper receipt as part of procedural compliance for Section 138 action (!) (!) - (!) . - It cites precedents on signatures differing constituting an offense under Section 138 and the need for the accused to prove nondelivery of the signature (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) . - It modifies the sentence from trial and appellate courts to a reduced fine and imprisonment, along with compensation to the complainant and litigation expenses (!) - (!) (!) - (!) . - It clarifies corrections to the judgment regarding a typographical error (six months to three months) (!) - (!) .
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 insuffic
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
