Smt. Pushpavathi, v. Sri. Ravikumar. S.
Case brief
What is this about?
Section 138 NI Act conviction upheld in revision; Section 139 presumption not rebutted; revision under Sections 397/401 CrPC dismissed; cheque no.273021 Canara Bank Mysuru dishonoured 'funds insufficient'; accused's plea that cheque issued to Prema (Chit contribution) contradicted by stand it was issued to Girish; failure to examine Prema drew adverse inference; reply notice Exhibits-D8/D9 held concocted; demand notice sent by RPAD and Courier; 'Addressee not claimed'; concurrent findings; perversity; High Court of Karnataka; Ravi V Hosmani, J; CRL.RP No. 698 of 2023; C.C.No.377/2017; Crl.A.No.201/2022.
What did the court decide?
Rejection of the accused's plea that the cheque was issued to Prema was proper: both Courts rightly drew an adverse inference for failure to examine said Prema, and in deposition the accused took a contradictory stand that the cheque was issued to Girish; receipt of the demand notice by courier lends the accused no benefit.