THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.340 of 2025

ORDER:

The present Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Sections 438 and 442 of BNSS aggrieved by the order and judgment dated 15.04.2025 in Crl.A.No.451 of 2023 on the file of the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad (for short, ‘the appellate Court’).

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter referred as arrayed in C.C.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant and accused are acquainted for past many years. Out of the said acquaintance the accused has approached the complainant in the year 2013 and requested for a hand loan of Rs.15,00,000/-. Out of the said acquaintance in the month of March, 2013, the complainant arranged hand loan amount of Rs.15,00,000/- to accused. Thereafter, the accused requested more money for various needs and that the complainant from March, 2013 to December, 2016 had lent an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- to the accused. That out of the afore mentioned amount, some amounts were transferred by way of electronic transfer from accounts of the complainant and complainant’s wife bank account and the remaining was paid in cash. That the complainant regularly requested the accused to repay the amount lent by him upon which the complainant and accused had entered into a Debt Settlement Agreement dated 28.07.2017 and the same was actually executed on 29.07.2017 as the accused wife was not available on 28.07.2017. That the said debt settlement agreement was duly signed by the accused and his wife and the said debt settlement agreement also reflects the cheques issued for repayment of total outstanding debt. That the accused had handed over three pronotes on 30.07.2017 for Rs.15,00,000/- each all dated 30.07.2017. That later in the month of December, 2016 the accused requested the complainant for extension of time and asked the complainant to return the cheques issued while entering into Debt Settlement Agreement for which the complainant returned the said cheques to the accused. Thereafter, accused got issued three fresh cheques bearing Nso.463753, 463754 and 463755, dated 02.07.2018 for a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- each, total amounting of Rs.45,00,000/- drawn on Canara Bank, Kumdanbagh Branch, Hyderabad. When the complainant presented the same in the bank, they were dishonoured and returned with an endoresement “Funds Insufficient” vide cheque return Memos dated 18.07.2018. Thereafter, the complainant issued legal notice to the accused on 06.08.2018 and despite receiving the same on 10.08.2018, the accused neither paid the said amount nor gave any reply, as such the accused is liable to be punished for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, ‘N.I. Act’).

4. The complainant filed the complaint before learned XVII ACMM, Hyderabad which took cognizance of the offence against the accused under Section 138 of N.I. Act and numbered as C.C.No.829 of 2018. Later on, the case was transferred to the learned X Special Magistrate Court and renumbered as C.C.No.24 of 2019 and thereafter, transferred to the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad (for short, ‘the trial Court’) and renumbered as C.C.N.I.No.10569 of 2022.

5. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, prosecution examined P.Ws.1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.15.

6. After hearing the parties on both sides and upon considering the evidence on record, the trial Court found the accused guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act, as such the convicted the accused under Section 255(2) Cr.P.C. The relevant portion reads as under:

“30. The accused has been questioned on the quantum of sentence upon which the accused pleaded mercy as he is the sole bread earner of his family and prayed to take lenient view.

Keeping in view the gravity of the offence committed, this Court has not taken lenient view while imposing sentence. As the accused is found guilty for the offence under Secti