T.N.R.Arul vs Govindasamy
2021 Latest Caselaw 2371 Mad

                                                                                    Crl.R.C.No.1267 of 2020


                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED : 03.02.2021

                                                          CORAM

                                    THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

                                              Crl.R.C.No.1267 of 2020 &
                                               Crl.M.P.No.8880 of 2020


                     T.N.R.Arul                             ...   Petitioner

                                                           Vs.

                     Govindasamy                            ...   Respondent




                     PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition filed under 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C. to set
                     aside the Judgment made in Crl.A.No.67 of 2019, dated 01.10.2020, by the
                     learned Principal District Judge, Namakkal, confirming the Judgment made in
                     S.T.C.No.904 of 2015, dated 30.10.2019, by the learned Judicial Magistrate,
                     Paramathy, convicting the petitioner herein for an offence under Section 138 of
                     Negotiable Instruments Act, and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment
                     of one month and to pay          a   compensation of Rs.4,00,000/-        to the
                     respondent/complaint under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C. in default to undergo
                     simple imprisonment for one month.




                     1/7




http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                                        Crl.R.C.No.1267 of 2020


                                  For Petitioner         :     Mr.V.Lakshmi Narayanan

                                  For Respondent         :     No appearance


                                                             ORDER

When the matter came up for hearing on 04.01.2021, this Court,

suspended the sentence of imprisonment alone till 29.01.2021 on condition that

the petitioner/appellant has to deposit the compensation amount of

Rs.4,00,000/- on or before 29.01.2021 and also directed the petitioner to send a

private notice to the respondent. In the order, dated 04.01.2021, this Court has

also observed that in default in payment of compensation within stipulated

period, the suspension of sentence granted in favour of the petitioner, shall

automatically be vacated without any further reference to this Court.

2. Today when the matter is listed under the caption for final

disposal, it is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the

order passed by this Court, dated 04.01.2021, has not been complied with and

the private notice was also not served on the respondent.

http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.R.C.No.1267 of 2020

3. Since the order passed by this Court dated 04.01.2021, has not

been complied with, and the petitioner has filed this Revision, challenging the

concurrent findings of the Courts below, the matter is taken up for final

disposal.

3. The petitioner was found guilty for the offence under Section 138

of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He was sentenced to undergo simple

imprisonment for one month and to pay a compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- in

default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of one month. On

Appeal by the accused, the Appellate Court, confirmed the conviction and

sentence.

4. A careful reading of the materials available on record, the trial

Court as well as appellate Court rightly appreciated the entire evidence and

found guilt of the accused and imposed sentence. A bare perusal of the entire

evidence of the petitioner / accused , it could be seen that the petitioner/

accused had admitted the execution of cheque and therefore, once the issuance

of cheque is admitted, Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act would attract

and the presumption under Section 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments

http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.R.C.No.1267 of 2020

Act can be drawn and it is for the accused has to rebut the presumption that

there is no legally enforceable debt and cheque has not been issued for legally

enforceable debt. Though the statutory presumption is rebuttable one, the

reading of the entire materials shows that the revision petitioner has not

rebutted the presumption in the manner known to law.

5. On a reading of the entire materials, both the Courts below have

appreciated the evidence in proper perspective, under the circumstances, this

Court does not find any perversity in the judgment of the both Courts below.

While exercising the reivisional jurisdiction, this Court need not sit in the

armchair of the appellate Court and re-appreciate the entire evidence and while

deciding revision case, this Court has to see whether any perversity is found in

appreciating the evidence, whereas in this case, this Court does not find any

perversity in the decision made by the Courts below. Therefore, this Court

finds that there is no merit in the revision, and there is no ground to interfere

with the judgment of the Courts below.

http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.R.C.No.1267 of 2020

6. In the result, the Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

03.02.2021

Speaking Order / Non-speaking order

Index : Yes / No. Internet : Yes.

rns

http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.R.C.No.1267 of 2020

To

1. The Principal District Judge, Namakkal.

2. The Judicial Magistrate, Paramathy,

http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.R.C.No.1267 of 2020

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

rns

Crl.R.C.No.1267 of 2020 & Crl.M.P.No.8880 of 2020

03.02.2021

http://www.judis.nic.in