1995 (12) TMI 414

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....3-9-1987. In pursuance to conciliation proceedings initiated by District Labour Officer, Kannur the disputes between the management and the union were settled and a sum of ₹ 1,50,583/- was agreed to be paid to the workers. The amount was not paid as agreed. Since then a sum of ₹ 29,700/- was paid. Towards the balance a cheque for ₹ 1,17,000/- was issued which when presented in the bank was returned with the endorsement "refer to the drawer". Notice under proviso (b) to Section 138 was sent by the complainant. The accused received that notice, but did not send any reply. Hence the complaint. 3. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge. The Magistrate found him guilty, convicted him and sentenced him to pay a ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the Act. The complainant is the President of an Employee Union and the amount covered by the cheque represents retrenchment compensation payable to them as per a conciliation agreement. The accused has no case that he was having sufficient funds in the bank on the date on which the cheque was presented. The complainant has not summoned the Bank Manager to prove that the drawer was not having sufficient funds in the bank. That the cheque was returned with endorsement 'refer to the drawer' is not disputed. The burden is on the complainant to show that the cheque was returned either for insufficiency of fund or that the amount exceeds the amount arranged to be paid. Since the amount covered by the cheque is due to the workers by way....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... been decided in so many words a learned Judge of this Court had incidentally referred to this aspect in Mrs. Jaya Baby v. K.K. Vijayan, (1993 (2) Ker LJ 704). It is observed therein that there is no merit in the contention that the complainant would be put to handicap due to want of powers for the Magistrate to impose a fine amount more than rupees five thousand. It is also observed that if such Magistrate is of the opinion that a more severe sentence is warranted he can resort to the steps envisaged in Section 325 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It is stated that even without resorting to such steps, a Magistrate can alleviate a complainant's grievance by resort to Section 357(1) of the Procedure Code. 8. The Madras High Court had oc....