Revision against conviction under Section 138 NI Act for dishonour of a Rs.5 lakh cheque. The court found no infirmity in the concurrent findings below since the presumption under Section 139 was not rebutted; a post-conviction payment receipt did not establish discharge. Revision dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRL RC No.1660 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05-01-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
CRL RC No. 1660 of 2023
Petitioner(s)
Vs
2.Isaakimuthu
Respondent(s)
PRAYER
To set aside the Judgment made in Crl.A.No.55 of 2022 dated 26.04.2023 before the Honble I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore and confirming the Learned Fast Track Judicial Magistrate No.II, coimbatore in CC.No.829 of 2017 dated 24.02.2020.
For Petitioner(s): M/s. T.Shanmugaboopathi For R1 Mr.R.Vinothraja, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 No Appearance
CRL RC No.1660 of 2023
ORDER
The Criminal Revision Case has been filed challenging the judgment dated 26.04.2023 passed in Crl.A.No.55 of 2022 by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Fast Track Judicial Magistrate No.II, Coimbatore, in C.C.No.829 of 2017, dated 24.02.2020.
for the second respondent.
CRL RC No.1660 of 2023
5.
to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant, in default to undergo a further period of three months simple imprisonment, which was confirmed by the learned Fast Track Judicial Magistrate No.II, Coimbatore, in C.C.No.829 of 2017, dated 24.02.2020. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner/accused filed the present revision case.
7. This Court finds that the second respondent marked four documents on his side, namely, the cheque marked as Ex.P1, the cheque return memo marked as Ex.P2, the legal notice marked as Ex.P3, and the acknowledgement receipt marked as Ex.P4. The second respondent, therefore, had established that the
CRL RC No.1660 of 2023
cheque was issued by the petitioner. The petitioner had not rebutted the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in any manner. Therefore, there is absolutely no infirmity in the judgments of the court below.
9. In any case, this Court finds no infirmity in the judgments of the Courts below convicting the petitioner for the aforesaid offence, and hence, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed.
05-01-2026
skr Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No
CRL RC No.1660 of 2023
To
1. Learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore,
2. Learned Fast Track Judicial Magistrate No.II, Coimbatore.
CRL RC No.1660 of 2023
SUNDER MOHAN J. skr
CRL RC No. 1660 of 2023
05-01-2026
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the conviction under Section 138 NI Act for cheque dishonour was sustainable when the statutory presumption under Section 139 stood unrebutted.
Whether a post-conviction receipt of Rs.5,00,000 established discharge of liability.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
K.Thangavel
State Rep.By Public Prosecutor
Isaakimuthu
Sunder Mohan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
