BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Reserved On : 20.07.2023 Delivered On : 22.08.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Crl. R.C.(MD)No.354 of 2019 Selvakumar .. Petitioner Vs.

P.Lakshmanan .. Respondent Prayer : This criminal revision case is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the order dated 21.02.2019 made in C.A.No.106 of 2017 on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli confirmed the order dated 21.09.2017 made in C.C.No.225 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruchirappalli and set aside the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vellaichamy For Respondent : Mr.S.T.Gopinath

ORDER

This petition has been filed by the petitioner to set aside the judgment and conviction passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Court, Tiruchirappalli in Crl.A.No.106 of 2017 on 21.02.2019, in confirming the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruchirappalli in C.C.No.225 of 2016 on

21.09.2017. In the trial Court, the petitioner herein filed a complaint as against the respondent herein under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act. The said complaint has been taken on file in C.C.No.225 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Trichy and the same was dismissed and the accused was acquitted. As against the judgment, the petitioner herein had preferred a criminal appeal in Crl.A.No.106 of 2017 on the file of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli and the appeal was also dismissed through judgment dated 21.02.2019. Aggrieved by the said judgment, this present Criminal Revision Case is filed.

2.The case of the defacto complainant in trial Court is that the respondent borrowed a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- on 06.03.007 and another sum of Rs.1,00,000/- on 08.05.2007, from him, promising to repay the same within one year. The accused did not repay the same and was evading. On 10.04.2015, the accused issued a cheque dated 13.04.2015 for Rs.2,00,000/- on Canara bank, Theppakulam Branch in favour of the defacto complainant. When the cheque was presented for collection, the same was returned as 'kindly contact the drawer/drawee bank and please present again'. This was intimated to the defacto complainant on 15.04.2015. The defacto complainant issued a legal notice on 19.04.2015. Hence, the trial Court has taken cognizance for the offence under Sections 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and issued summons and on summons, the petitioner/accused appeared before the trial Court and thereafter, the copy of the records were furnished to the petitioner under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. Thereafter substance of charge was explained to the petitioner and he denied the charges.

3.Thereby, the defacto complainant had examined P.W.1 and P.W.2 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.4 and on the side of the accused, no one was examined and no document was marked. After completion of defacto complainant evidences, the accused was examined under Section 313(1)(b) of Cr.P.C., with regard to incriminating circumstances found in the prosecution evidences. The accused denied the evidences.

4.Upon perusing the oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court dismissed the complaint by a judgment, dated 21.09.2017. Aggrieved by which, the petitioner filed a criminal appeal in C.A.No.106 of 2017 before the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchirappalli. The appellate Court also confirmed the judgment of the trial Court and dismissed the appeal through its judgment dated 21.02.2019.

5.Aggrieved by the said judgment, this revision case has been filed on the following grounds:-

The judgments of the Courts below are against law, weight of evidence and all probabilities of the case. Both the lower Courts erred in holding that the debt is time barred and not legally enforceable. The Courts below ought not to have acquitted the accused in the light of the fact that the accused did not discharge his initia