2021 (11) TMI 939

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ded the sentence which reads as follows:-     Name of the convict       Convicted under Section        Sentence     Kuldeep Singh        138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.        Rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten months and compensation equivalent the cheque amount alongwith 12% interest, per annum from the date of transaction till the actual realisation + SI of three months in default of compensation. However, the payment of compensation shall be subject to result of appeal and revision, if any, preferred by the convict. Period of detention already undergone by the convic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....otice was served and thereafter, the complaint was filed. The trial Court after considering the relevant documents and evidence on record, convicted the petitioner under Section 138 of the Act of 1881 and sentenced him, as has been detailed hereinabove. Aggrieved against the said judgment, the petitioner had filed an appeal in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, who after considering the entire material on record including the evidence and the documents produced and after re-appreciating the same, dismissed the appeal of the petitioner. It is against the said order that the petitioner has filed the present criminal revision petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the present case, it was the relati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m the said Babla, clarifying that the cheque which was allegedly issued as a security cheque was not traceable and the amount was being returned. It was further observed that no complaint was filed by the petitioner with respect to the return of the cheque or for the alleged misuse of the same. It was also found that evidence of DW1, is contrary to the version given by the petitioner in the statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. inasmuch as per the evidence of DW1, who is son of the petitioner, the petitioner had given two blank cheques whereas as per the statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., it had been stated that the petitioner had given one blank signed cheque as security cheque. Thus, the defence sought to be put forth did not inspir....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....drawer under the Negotiable Instruments Act is also not acceptable. There can be no doubt regarding the fact that the security cheque is an integral part of the commercial process entered into between the Petitioner and Respondent/ Complainant. The security cheque is not only a deterrent for the drawer against dishonoring his financial commitment but can also be legally and validly utilized towards the discharging of the liability of the Drawer. It cannot by any stretch be argued that a security cheque is not handed over or issued in pursuance of any undischarged liability. To hold so would defeat the whole purpose of a security cheque. In the considered opinion of the Court, a security cheque is an acknowledgment of liability on the part o....