TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (6) TMI 476
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted by the respondent who was the complainant in the Trial Court. The Sessions Judge's Court in its order dated 02-09-2016 dismissed the appeal, confirming the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the Trial Court dated 02-05-2015 in C.C.No.7901/2012. Aggrieved by the said order, the accused has preferred this revision petition. 2. The summary of the case of the complainant in the Trial Court is that, himself and the accused are well acquainted with each other as friends. During the month of November-2011, the accused borrowed a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- from him as a loan, promising to repay the same together with interest at the rate of Rs. 2% per month. Since the accused did not repay the loan amount within the agreed time and when demanded for its payment by the complainant, the accused issued a cheque bearing No.550334 dated 20-12-2011, drawn on Bank of India, Bangalore Main Branch, Bangalore, drawn in his favour, for a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- towards the repayment of the loan amount. When the said cheque was presented for its realisation by the complainant through his banker, the same came to be returned unpaid with the banker's endorsement 'funds....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that arise for my consideration in this revision petition is: Whether the judgments under revision are perverse, illegal and erroneous, warranting interference at the hands of this Court? 11. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused in his brief argument mainly canvassed only one point that, the Trial Court rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. on 02-05-2015 and proceeded to pass the impugned judgment on the main petition also on the very same day, as such, he had no opportunity to challenge the order passed on the application filed under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. He submitted that the accused puts his signature in Kannada language whereas the cheque is bearing the signature in English language, as such, he intended to summon the Branch Manager of the concerned Bank in which the accused was maintaining his account and to examine him as a witness, but the accused could not get any opportunity in that regard. However, learned counsel fairly conceded that he would not dispute that the drawer of the cheque at Ex.P-1 is the accused. 12. Learned counsel for the respondent/complainant in his arguments submitted tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lace address of the accused and has produced a copy of the legal notice at Ex.P-3, two postal receipts at Ex.P-4 and two returned registered postal covers said to have been sent to the accused, containing the notices in them at Ex.P-5. One of the said cover bears the alleged work place address of the accused and the second one bears his residential address. The accused, nowhere has denied or disputed that the address shown on those two returned postal covers, either as incorrect or as not depicting his address. Those two registered postal articles containing legal notices in them sent to the residential and work place addresses of the accused have been returned to the sender (complainant) with the postal shara "I.D" (intimation delivered) "not claimed". Therefore, when the complainant has sent the legal notices as required under Section 138 of the N.I. Act to both the available correct and complete addresses of the accused under Registered Post Acknowledgement Due (RPAD) and since the accused even after the postal authorities delivering him an intimation about the arrival of the articles, has not claimed the same, it has to be taken that there is a deemed service of notice upon the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the said order of rejection passed on the said application. 16. In this regard, it has to be noticed that a perusal of the Trial Court records would got to show that, the Trial Court after recording the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., afforded an opportunity to the accused to lead defence evidence and few adjournments were also given to the accused at his request to enable him to lead evidence. However, such opportunities also were not utilised by the petitioner/accused. Even as finally and as last chance also, several opportunities were given to the petitioner which he did not make use of. 17. The accused had made an application under Section 311 r/w Sec 91 of the Cr.P.C. to summon the Branch Manager, Bank of India, Bangalore, which application came to be allowed by the Trial Court and opportunity was given to him to summon the witness from his side. It was ordered for issuing witness summons to the said witness who was also directed to produce account opening form and specimen signature card of the savings bank account of the accused in his branch. However, the accused was required to pay the process for summoning the said witness. On the subseque....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onduct of the accused that through out he has been interested in adopting delay tactics rather than assisting the Court in the disposal of the case on its merit. Still, the Trial Court had given him sufficient opportunities to lead defence evidence after recording the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. and also subsequently by allowing his application filed under Section 311 read with Section 91 of the Cr.P.C. Since the accused failed to make use of the opportunities which was sufficiently given to him, the Trial Court has proceeded to reject the similar application filed under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. and proceeded to pass the impugned judgment. 21. Further, it can be seen that the purpose for which the accused wanted the Bank Manager to examine as a witness was only for the reason to show that, the signature on the cheque at Ex.P-1 does not pertain to him. In that regard, two aspects can be noticed. The first and foremost aspect is that the accused did not move any application in the Trial Court seeking reference of his signature to any handwriting expert. Secondly, the cheque at Ex.P-1 was not dis-honoured by the banker for the reason of any alleged d....