Venkatesh Gowda vs Govindaiah. D on 2 August, 2025

0
1


This appeal is preferred by the appellant challenging
the conviction judgment and order of sentence passed
by the learned IV Addl. Judge, Court of Small Causes &
Addl. C.M.M., Bengaluru in C.C.No.11994/2021,
dated:18.12.2023 as to the alleged offence under
Section 138 of N.I.Act and prays to set aside the
impugned judgment & order of sentence and acquit the
accused.

2. The appellant herein was the accused and
respondent was the complainant before the trial court.
For the sake of convenience, parties would be referred
to by the ranks they were assigned before the trial
court.

3. Brief facts of the case are as under:

The complainant and accused are known to each
other since several years. During the month of March
2021, the accused had requested the complainant for
financial assistance of Rs.2,50,000/- to meet his urgent
family necessities. Accordingly the complainant had
paid a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- to the accused and the
accused had agreed to repay the said amount within six
months along with interest at the rate of 24% per
annum and towards repayment of the loan amount, the
Crl.Appeal No.109/2024

accused had voluntarily issued a post dated cheque
bearing No.341876 dated:28.09.2021 for Rs.2,50,000/-
drawn on Bank of India, Bengaluru Branch, Bengaluru in
favour of the complainant. When the complainant had
presented the said cheque for encashment it came to
be dishonoured with an endorsement “Funds
Insufficient” vide Banker’s Memo dated:29.09.2021.
Thereafter the complainant got issued the legal notice
dated:26.10.2021 calling upon the accused to pay the
cheque amount. Despite service of legal notice, the
accused had neither paid the cheque amount nor
replied to the said notice. Hence the complainant was
constrained to file the complaint under Section 200 of
Cr.P.C., against the accused for the offence punishable
under Section 138 of N.I.Act.



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here