2025 (11) TMI 672

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a has filed this Criminal Revision Petition under Sections 438 and 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, challenging judgment in Criminal Appeal No.29 of 2023 dated 15.10.2024. The first respondent herein is the State of Kerala and the Second respondent is the complainant before the trial court. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, the learned counsel for the second respondent and also heard the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent. 3. I shall refer the parties in this revision petition as 'accused' and 'complainant' for convenience. 4. The brief facts of the case: The complainant filed a complaint before the Magistrate Court alleging that the accused committing offence....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r Section 357(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.'). In default of payment of compensation, simple imprisonment for a period of three months also was imposed. 7. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Magistrate Court, the revision petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.29 of 2023 before the Sessions Court, Alappuzha. The learned Sessions Judge accepted Exts.D7 to D9 documents produced by the accused before the appellate court and discussed the evidence in detail and finally confirmed the conviction while modifying the sentence, to undergo simple imprisonment till rising of the Court and to pay a compensation of Rs.9,00,000/- and by imposing simple imprisonment for three(3) months in default of payment of compensation. 8. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act by the accused. Here PW1 filed affidavit in lieu of chief examination and the same was in tune with the averments in the complaint, specifically deposing that the accused borrowed the amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- on 06.01.2018 Rs. 2,00,000/-on 15.01.2018 and Rs. 4,50,000/- on 20.04.2018. He also deposed that the money paid on 06.01.2018 and 15.01.2018 were given to the father in law of the accused on behalf of the accused. He deposed about the failure of the accused in providing the employment visa as assured and also non return of the money. According to PW1, then on repeated demands the accused issued Ext.P1 cheque bearing No.319796 dated 14.08.2020, for Rs.9,00,000/- with assurance of encashment. But o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 12. It is true that in this case the accused raised the allegation against the complainant as evident from Exts.D1 to D6 that he had made a complaint before the District Police Chief, Alappuzha on 09.07.2020 against the complainant and her husband and a case was registered alleging commission of offence under Section 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, by them. Mere lodging of complaint against the complainant who is in possession of the cheque by itself would not absolve the liability of the accused or disentitles the twin presumptions under Section 118 and 139 of the N.I. Act in terms of the holder of the cheque. Here, as per the evidence of PW1, Ext.P1 was issued to him in discharge of the liability for Rs. 9,00,000/- obtaine....