ORDER

This petition has been filed by the petitioner to set aside the judgment and conviction passed by the Mahila Fast Track Court, Nagercoil in Crl.A.No.93 of 2012 on 30.10.2018, in confirming the judgment and conviction passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithurai in S.T.C.No.1506 of 2007 on 08.10.2012. In the trial Court, the complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act as against the petitioner and the trial Court convicted the accused and sentence him to undergo one year simple imprisonment and to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) as compensation in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment by a judgment, dated 08.10.2012. As against the said conviction and judgment, the petitioner filed a criminal appeal in C.A.No.93 of 2012 and the same was disposed of by the Mahila Court (Fast Track Court), Nagercoil, by dismissing the appeal through its judgment dated 30.10.2018. Aggrieved by the said judgment, this present Criminal Revision Case is filed.

2.The case of the complainant is that on 03.12.2006, the petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- and for that, he gave a post dated cheque dated 03.02.2007 of Canara Bank, Marthandam Branch. When the defacto complainant presented the cheque for collection before Central Cooperative Bank, Kaliyakkavilai Branch, the same was returned as 'payment stopped by the drawer'. Thereafter on 10.02.2007, the defacto complainant issued notice and the same was received on 12.02.2007. Thereafter, the petitioner neither given reply nor repaid the amount. Hence, the defacto complainant had given a private complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai. The learned Magistrate had taken cognizance in S.T.C.No.1506 of 2007 for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Thereafter, issued process to the accused and accused was served copies under Section 207 of Cr.P.C., and then substance of the charge was explained to the accused and she denied charges.

3.The complainant had examined P.W.1 to P.W.3 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.

8 and on the side of the accused, no one was examined and marked Exs.D.1 to D.3. After examination of prosecution witnesses, the accused was examined under Section 313(1)(b) of Cr.P.C., with regard to incriminating circumstances found in the complainant side evidences. The accused denied the evidences.

4.Upon perusing the oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the petitioner guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced her to undergo one year simple imprisonment and imposed fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment by a judgment, dated 08.10.2012. Aggrieved by the said conviction and judgment, the petitioner filed a criminal appeal in C.A.No.93 of 2012 before the Principal Sessions Court and the same was made over to Mahila Fast Track Court, Nagercoil. The appellate Court also confirmed the judgment and conviction and dismissed the appeal through its judgment dated 13.10.2018.

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

The judgment of the trial Court as well as the appellate Court are contrary to law, weight of the evidences and all probabilities of the case. The appellate Court failed to consider that the respondent did not have source of income and did not adduce documents or any evidence to show his income. The lower Court failed to note that the burden of proof is upon the complainant and the complainant failed to prove the case with sufficient evidence. The trial Court failed to note that there is no evidence for the issue of the cheque in discharge of debt or liability. The trial Court failed to consider that as per the complainant evidence, the cheque was presented before the Kaliyakkavilai branch but the seal was named as Marthandam branch. Further the respondent already given a complaint t