S.Gangadhara Mudaliar And Company,Ekambarakuppam,Rep. v. Panner Selvam Textiles,Ekambarakuppam Rep.By Its

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1048 of 2004 ORDER:

1. This revision case is filed by the complainant challenging the judgment dated 7.11.2000 passed in C.C.No.95 of 1993 by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nagari, Chittoor District.

2. The petitioner filed the complaint in the above C.C. against the 1st respondent and others before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nagari for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The learned Magistrate after considering the oral and documentary evidence i.e., P.W.1 and Exs.P1 to P22 found the 1st respondent guilty for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and convicted and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months, while acquitting the other accused.

The petitionercomplainant filed this revision seeking enhancement of sentence.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner succeeded in establishing his case for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the trial Court having found the 1st respondent-accused guilty for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, sentenced the 1st respondent to pay fine only and that the cheque amount involved in this case is Rs.1,83,358/- and as such, the sentence of fine imposed by the trial Court is not proportionate to the offence alleged against the 1st respondent.

4. It is pertinent to note that the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is punishable either with imprisonment or with fine or with both. Therefore, this Court is of the view that considering the evidence and other material on record, the trial Court

convicted and sentenced the 1st respondent to pay fine alone.

5. The learned Counsel for the 1st respondent brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner-complainant is no more in existence.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the submission made by the learned Counsel for the 1st respondent, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the judgment under revision.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed.

_______________ RAJA ELANGO, J 18th July 2016 Nn

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1048 of 2004 18.7.2016 Nn