TMI Blog2000 (9) TMI 1081X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent alleging the commission of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. After the trial, the Magistrate found the respondent (accused) guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and convicted him. He was sentenced to pay a fine of ₹ 15,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. Aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence, the respondent herein preferred Cri. Appeal No. 212 of 1992. The learned Additional Sessions Judge set aside the conviction and sentence imposed upon the respondent and acquitted him. JR/KR/Ke355/2000/PYB-RK/USA Aggrieved by the order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, the compla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed either in law or on facts. According to the learned counsel, the learned Additional Sessions Judge ought to have found that the promise made by the accused to repay the time barred debt would come within the purview of Section 25(3) of the Indian Contract Act. He further contended that the learned Additional Sessions Judge seriously erred in finding that the accused is not guilty of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent supported the judgment of the lower Court and urged that there is no ground for interference. 6. The only question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the respondent who issued the cheque in question in discharge of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. In this case, admittedly, the cheque in question was issued in discharge of a time barred debt. It cannot be said that a time barred debt is a legally enforceable debt. In this connection, it is also relevant to note the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reported in Girdhari Lal Rathi v. P.T.V. Ramanujachari 1997 (2) Cri 658. It has been held in that case that if a cheque is issued for a time barred debt and it is dishonoured, the accused cannot be convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act simply on the ground that the debt was not legally recoverable. I am fully in agreement with the view expressed by the learned Judge in the decision referred to above. 8. The learned counsel for the appellant placed stron ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
