TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 1359
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....LAKKAD) AND MR P. P. SRI. C. K. PRASAD ORDER Narayana Pisharadi, J The revision petitioner is the accused in the case C.C No. 884/2012 on the file of the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palakkad. Conviction entered and sentence imposed on him by the courts below under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are challenged in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing that Ext.P1 cheque was issued by the revision petitioner in discharge of a legally enforceable debt and accordingly, found him guilty of the offence under Section 138 of the Act and convicted him thereunder and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 2,75,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. It was also directed that if the fine amount ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... trial court as well as the appellate court, I find that there is no impropriety, illegality or error warranting interference in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction of this Court. Execution of Ext. P1 cheque by the accused was proved by the evidence of PW1. The revision petitioner failed to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the Act in any manner. The courts below have properly appreci....