Once a signature on a cheque is admitted, the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 applies, shifting the burden onto the accused to rebut the existence of a legally enforceable debt through cogent evidence rather than unsubstantiated claims of misuse.

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 06.10.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED LVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE, IN CRIMINAL APPEAL No.138/2020 AND THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DATED 10.01.2020 PASSED BY THE LEARNED XXII ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BANGALORE, IN C.C. No.20707/2018 AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE COMPLAINT IN TOTO.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard Sri N.Shantkumar, advocate for Sri H.B. Chandrasekhar, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri B.J.Krishna, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. Accused who suffered an order of conviction in C.C No. 20707/2018 dated 10.01.2020 on the file of the XXII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.138/2020 dated 06.10.2025 on the file of the LVIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is the revision petitioner.

3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost for disposal of the present revision petition are as under:

3.1 A complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure came to be lodged with the jurisdictional Magistrate alleging commission of the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, contending that accused and the complainant are known to each other for more than ten years.

3.2 It is the case of the complainant that accused approached him in the month of January 2017 seeking financial assistance in a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- for purchase of a site in Mysuru and also to meet family necessity. The complainant lent a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- on 20.01.2017. Accused did not repay the said amount even after six months.

3.3 Later on, accused issued a cheque bearing No.584395 dated 11.06.2018 in a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- drawn on Vijaya Bank, New Saraswathipuram Branch, Mysuru, in the name of the complainant, which on presentation came to be dishonored with an endorsement ‘funds insufficient’.

4. Complainant issued a legal notice calling upon the accused to make good the amount covered under the cheque.

5. A reply came to be issued by the advocate on behalf of the accused on 05.07.2018 whereunder, it has been stated that accused has borrowed only sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. The repayment was made by cash in a sum of Rs.50,000/- and towards balance amount of Rs.50,000/-, the cheque in question bearing No.584395 was issued which was not encashed by the complainant for long.

6. In the year 2013, the complainant approached the accused and obtained one more cheque bearing No.129601010010163 which was encashed. Therefore, there was no amount payable by the accused to the complainant and a cheque which has been portrayed as lost towards the repayment of Rs.50,000/- bearing No.584395 was misused by the complainant by filling up Rs.5,00,000/- and thus sought for registering the criminal action.

7. Since the reply was untenable, complainant approached the jurisdictional Police for taking action.

8. Learned Trial Magistrate after completing the necessary formalities, recorded the plea of the accused. Accused pleaded not guilty. Therefore, trial was held.

9.