Bangalore District Court
M/S.Gajavadana Chits Pvt. Ltd vs Raja Ram Singh on 10 March, 2025
C.C.NO.27114/2021
0
KABC030668202021
Presented on : 20-09-2021
Registered on : 01-10-2021
Decided on : 10-03-2025
Duration : 3 years, 5 months, 20 days
IN THE COURT OF THE XXVIII ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY
Present:
Soubhagya.B.Bhusher,
B.A.,LL.B.,LL.M
XXVIII A.C.J.M, Bengaluru City.
DATED: THIS THE 10th DAY OF MARCH-2025
C.C.NO.27114/2021
Complainant: M/s. Gajavadana Chits Pvt.,Ltd (Regd),
Having registered office at No.21,
2nd Floor, Rushabh Mansion,
6th Cross, Opp: Alahabad Bank,
Sampige Road, Malleshwaram,
Bengaluru-03,
R/by its Managing Director,
Sri.Varadaraj.
(By Sri.S.S.Associates & Advocates.,)
V/s
Accused: Sri.Raja Ram Singh S/o Narayan Singh,
Age: 52 years, R/at No.1062, Santhe
Beedi, Pattalamma Layout, Kadugodi,
Bengaluru-560067.
(By Sri.Panch Mukesh.B.,Adv.,)
C.C.NO.27114/2021
1
:JUDGMENT:
This case arises out of the private complaint filed
by the complainant against the accused under section
200 of Cr.P.C., for an offence punishable under section
138 of N.I.Act.
2. The case of the complainant’s in brief is as
under:
It is the case of the complainant is that the
accused is one of the subscriber/member in chit group
No.G2AWFA-39, ticket No.13 for a chit value of
Rs.3,00,000/-, payable at Rs.15,000/- over a period of
20 months. The accused was bided the said chit for
Rs.75,000/- in the chit auction dated: 10.01.2019 and
he has received the prized amount of Rs.2,25,000/-
through cheque and on the same day he had executed
a receipt/voucher. Further stated that the accused has
paid the monthly chit subscription amount of
Rs.15,000/- including dividend amount of Rs.90,000/-,
thereafter, he has not paid the monthly chit subscription
amount of Rs.2,10,000/- and the said chit was ended
on May-2020. Therefore the complainant had issued a
demand notice to the accused calling upon him to pay
the balance subscription amount. After issuance of the
demand notice during the 2nd week of Dec-2020, he
had issued the post dated cheque No.733667 dated:
30.12.2020 for Rs.2,39,400/- drawn on M/s.State Bank
of India, Kadugodi branch, Bengaluru. Thereafter, on
C.C.NO.27114/2021
2
31.12.2020 the complainant presented the said cheque
for realization through its banker M/s Karur Vysya Bank
Ltd., Malleshwaram branch, Bengaluru. But the said
cheque was dishonored on 01.01.2021 as “Funds
Insufficient”. Thereafter, on 29.01.2021 the complainant
got issued a legal notice to the accused through its
counsel calling upon him to pay the cheque amount.
The said notice was returned as “unclaimed” on
09.02.2021. After issuance of the notice, the accused
neither reply to the notice nor paid the cheque amount.
As such, the accused have committed an offence
punishable under section 138 of N.I.Act. Hence, the
present complaint came to be filed before this court on
15.03.2021.
3. After the complaint was filed, the cognizance of
the offence cited therein was taken and it was
registered as P.C.R No.13312/2021. Sworn statement
of the complainant was recorded. Since there were
sufficient materials to proceed against the accused, an
order was passed on 15.09.2021 to register the case in
Register No.III.
4. Thereafter, summons was issued to the
accused and he has appeared before the court through
advocate and secured bail. He was furnished its
necessary papers as complied under section 208 of
Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the plea of the accused was
recorded by the court. He has pleaded not guilty and
C.C.NO.27114/2021
3
claimed to be tried.
5. The complainant in support of its case have
examined its Managing Director as PW.1 and got
marked 08 documents at Ex.P.1 to 08 and closed its
side. The leaned counsel for the accused has
submitted no cross of PW.1. Hence, the cross of PW.1
taken as nil.
6. After closer of the evidence of the complainant,
the statement of the accused under section 313 of
Cr.P.C., was recorded. He has denied the incriminating
evidence appearing against him. The learned counsel
for the accused has submitted no defence evidence.
Hence, the defence evidence taken as nil.
7. Heard the arguments on both the sides and
perused the material placed on record.
8. Upon hearing the arguments and on perusal of
the material placed on record, the following points arise
for my consideration:
1.Whether the complainant proves the
existence of legally enforceable
debt/liability.?
2.Whether the complainant further proves
that the accused had issued the cheque-
Ex.P.3, towards the discharge of the said
legally enforceable debt/liability.?
3.Whether the complainant further proves
that cheque-Ex.P.3 was dishonored for
the reasons “Funds Insufficient” and
thereafter the accused had failed to
C.C.NO.27114/2021
4
repay the same within the statutory
period, inspite of receipt of legal notice.?
4.Whether the accused have thus
committed an offence punishable under
section 138 of N.I.Act.?
5. What order?
9. My answers to the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Affirmative
Point No.2: In the Affirmative
Point No.3: In the Affirmative
Point No.4: In the Affirmative
Point No.5: As per final order, for the following:
:REASONS:
10. POINT NO.1 TO 4: These points are inter-
related to each other and finding given on any one
point will bearing on the others. Hence, in order to
avoid repetition of facts and evidence, I have taken
these points altogether for common discussion. The
case of the complainant is that he was acquainted with
the accused. The accused is a subscriber/member of
chit group No.G2AWFA, ticket No.13 for a chit value of
Rs.3,00,000/-. The monthly chit amount of Rs.15,000/-
over a period of 20 months. The said chit was bidded
by the accused for Rs.75,000/- and he has received the
prized amount of Rs.2,25,000/- through cheque, on the
same day he had executed a receipt/voucher. The
accused has paid the monthly chit subscription amount
of Rs.15,000/- including dividend amount of
C.C.NO.27114/2021
5
Rs.2,10,000/-, thereafter, he has not paid subscription
amount and the said chit was ended on May-2020.
Therefore the complainant had issued a demand notice
to the accused calling upon him to pay the balance
subscription amount. After issuance of demand notice
the accused had issued the post dated cheque in
question. The complainant was presented the said
cheque for realization through its banker. But the said
cheque was dishonored as “Funds Insufficient”.
Thereafter the complainant got issued a legal notice to
the accused through its counsel. Inspite of issuance of
the notice, the accused neither reply to the notice nor
paid the cheque amount. As such, the accused have
committed an offence punishable under section 138 of
N.I.Act. Hence, the present complaint came to be filed
before this court.
11. In support of the case, the complainant’s have
examined its Managing Director as P.W.1 and 08
documents were marked at Ex.P.1 to 08. In the chief
examination P.W.1 has repeated the contents taken by
the complainant in the complaint. Ex.P.1 is the certified
copy of the minutes of meeting. Ex.P.2 is the voucher.
Ex.P.3 is the cheque issued by the accused in favour of
the complainant dated: 30.12.2020 for Rs.2,39,400/-.
Ex.P.3(a) is the signature of the accused. Ex.P.4 is the
bank memo dated:01.01.2021 informing the dishonor of
the cheque as “Funds Insufficient”. Ex.P.5 is the office
C.C.NO.27114/2021
6
copy of legal notice dated: 29.01.2021. Ex.P.6 is the
postal receipt. Ex.P.7 is the returned postal cover.
Ex.P.7(a) are the returned legal notice. Ex.P.8 is the
Complaint.
12. In order to attract the offence punishable
under section 138 of N.I.Act, the complainant is firstly
required to prove the existence of legally enforceable
debt/liability, for which the cheque came to be issued.
The learned counsel for the complainant has submits
that from the evidence placed on record, the fact that
the accused after taking the chit amount failed to repay
the subscription amount including dividend amount.
After the repeated request made by the complainant,
the accused has not paid any amount to the
complainant. Further submits that the accused in order
to repayment of debt/liability had issued the cheque in
question in favour of the complainant. He further
submits that the accused has not denied Ex.P.3 being
his cheque drawn on his account. When the signature
is not disputed, the presumption under section 139
N.I.Act is to be drawn in favour of the complainant. The
accused has failed to elicit anything in the cross
examination of P.W.1 to disbelieve the case of the
complainant. The defence have failed to rebut the
presumption under section 139 N.I.Act. He further
submits that the accused has failed to produce any
believable evidence how the cheque was got the
C.C.NO.27114/2021
7
complainant and why he has not returned back the
same is not clear. He further submits that under section
139 of N.I.Act, there is a presumption that the cheque
has been issued for discharge of legally enforceable
debt/liability. In the present case, the accused has not
disputed Ex.P.3 being his cheque drawn on his
account. The said presumption is available to the
complainant. Moreover, under section 118 of N.I.Act,
there is a presumption that the Negotiable Instruments
is drawn on the date, for the amount and in favour of
the person as shown in it. It is for the accused to rebut
the said presumption. But in the case on hand no such
evidence forthcoming. Hence, the complainant have
proved their case.
13. Further in order to prove the guilt of the
accused for an offence punishable under section 138 of
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the complainant is
required to prove the following ingredients beyond
reasonable doubt:
i. The accused had issued the cheque in favour
of the complainant.
ii. The said cheque has been issued in
discharge of a legally recoverable
debt/liability and is for consideration.
iii. The said cheque has been dishonored on
presentation.
iv. The accused has failed to make payment of
cheque amount within statutory period of
service of legal notice served to him by the
complainant.
C.C.NO.27114/2021
8
14. In order to prove the case, the Managing
Director of the complainant company is examined
himself as PW.1 in the form of affidavit and reiterated
almost all the contents of the complaint and got marked
the 08 documents at Ex.P.1 to 08. In the chief
examination PW.1 has specifically deposed that in
order to repayment of due/debt the accused had issued
the cheque in favour of the complainant. Further
deposed that when the complainant was presented the
said cheque for encashment same was dishonor as
“funds insufficient”. Thereafter the complainant have
issued a legal notice to the accused, inspite of issuance
of the notice, the accused neither reply to the notice nor
paid the cheque amount. The evidence given by the
complainant/PW.1 remained unchallenged by the
accused.
15. During the course of proceedings, both the
parties and their respective counsels have filed a joint
memo. The contents of the joint memo are as follows:
“1.During the said proceedings both the
complainant and the accused have come
forward to settle the dispute and to amicably
resolve their dispute in the following manner as
agreed to herein thereby resting all claims
against each other in terms of this joint memo as
follows:
2. The accused has agreed to pay the total
amount of Rs.2,10,000/- out cheque amount
C.C.NO.27114/2021
9
Rs.2,39,400/- to the complainant who agreed to
receive the same as full an final settlement
amount by way of six monthly installments.
a) Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty Thousand only) on
10.04.2025.
b) Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only)
on 10.05.2025.
c) Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only)
on 10.06.2025.
d) Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only)
on 10.07.2025.
e) Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only)
on 10.08.2025.
f) Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) on
10.09.2025.
3. The above settlement amount is full and final
settlement of the parties and there is no any
claim each, other than this claim.
4. In the event of non-compliance of the above
terms, the complainant shall be at liberty to
proceed accordance with the law, and this court
pleased to pass order in terms of joint memo,
the accused has also agreed if he fails to
comply to this joint memo. Hence, prays to pass
the judgment as per joint memo.
16. By filing the above said joint memo the
accused has admitted the legally enforceable
debt/liability as stated by the complainant in the
complaint. By considering the joint memo and
submission of the learned counsel for the complainant
as well as the learned counsel for the accused, this
court deem it proper to grant time to the accused for
repayment of the amount to the complainant. Thus,
C.C.NO.27114/2021
10
material available on record clearly discloses that the
complainant have complied all the ingredients of
Negotiable Instruments Act. In view of forgoing
discussions, this court is of the opinion that the
complainant have established that the accused have
committed an offence punishable under section 138 of
Negotiable Instruments Act. The joint memo filed by the
complainant and the accused is sufficient. Accordingly,
I answer point No.1 to 4 in the “Affirmative”.
17. POINT NO.5: In view of the reasons stated
and discussed on point No.1 to 4, I proceed to pass the
following:
ORDER
Acting under section 255(2) of Cr.P.C.
the accused is convicted for an offence
punishable under section 138 of N.I.Act.
The bail bond executed by the
accused is hereby stands cancelled.
The accused is sentence to pay fine
Rs.2,10,000/- (Rupees two lakhs ten
thousand only) to the complainant and the
said fine amount shall be paid to the
complainant as compensation as per
section 357(1)(b) of Cr.P.C.
Terms and conditions of the joint
memo becomes part and parcel of this
order.
C.C.NO.27114/2021
11
In default of payment of the fine
amount as agreed upon, the accused shall
under simple imprisonment for 03 months.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer
typed by her, corrected by me and then judgment
pronounced in the open court on 10 th day of March-
2025)(Soubhagya.B.Bhusher)
XXVIII Addl. Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bengaluru City.
ANNEXURE
List of witness examined on behalf of the complainant:
PW.1 : Sri.Varadaraju.
List of documents marked on behalf of the complainant:
Ex.P.1 : Certified copy minutes of meeting.
Ex.P.2 : Voucher. Ex.P.3 : Cheque. Ex.P.3(a) : Signature of the accused. Ex.P.4 : Bank endorsement. Ex.P.5 : Office copy of the legal notice. Ex.P.6 : Postal receipt Ex.P.7 : Returned postal cover. Ex.P.7(a) : Returned legal notice. Ex.P.8 : Complaint.
List of witnesses examined on behalf of the accused:
-Nil-
List of documents marked on behalf of the accused:
-Nil-
XXVIII Addl. Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bengaluru City.
C.C.NO.27114/2021
12
10.03.2025 (Judgment pronounced in the Open
Court Vide Separate Sheet):ORDER:
Acting under section 255(2) of
Cr.P.C. the accused is convicted for
an offence punishable under section
138 of N.I.Act.
The bail bond executed by the
accused is hereby stands cancelled.
The accused is sentence to pay
fine Rs.2,10,000/- (Rupees two lakhs
ten thousand only) to the complainant
and the said fine amount shall be
paid to the complainant as
compensation as per section 357(1)
(b) of Cr.P.C.
Terms and conditions of the joint
memo becomes part and parcel of
this order.
In default of payment of the fine
amount as agreed upon, the accused
shall under simple imprisonment for
03 months.
XXVIII Addl. Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bengaluru City.
[ad_1]
Source link