IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Criminal Revision No.127 of 2010. Date of decision: 28.07.2010. Shri Madan Lal … …Petitioner Versus Smt.Hirawati … …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Dev Darshan Sud,J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No. For the Petitioner: MrAshok Kumar Sood, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr.J.L. Bhardwaj, Advocate. Dev Darshan Sud,J. This petition has been filed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, affirming the conviction and sentence imposed upon the petitioner by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Manali, District Kullu, sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay compensation of Rs.75,000/-. The findings have been affirmed by the learned appellate Court. 2. The complainant had approached the Court pleading therein that she is the owner of a building known as Hotel Naveen, situated near School Bazar, 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement? Yes. 2 Manali, District Kullu. This building was handed over to the petitioner-accused on lease for a period of five years from 1.4.2001 till 31.3.2006 on an annual licence fee of Rs.four lacs. The petitioner failed to make payment of this amount. Later on he issued cheque in favour of the complainant on 15.5.2006 for a sum of Rs.50,000/- drawn on Punjab National Bank, Manali. When this cheque was presented to the bank, it was dishonoured with the remarks “insufficient funds”. On the evidence as lead, the learned trial Court convicted the petitioner which was affirmed by the learned appellate Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued a number of points urging that both the Courts below have reached a perverse conclusion. A number of grounds were urged including the tampering of the number of cheque etc. 4. I do not find from the evidence on record that any such ground has been made/proved on the record. Rather I find that the petitioner has been litigating from the trial stage up to the appellate stage on all possible defences available to him. I find no perversity in the judgment of the Courts below, more especially, since the learned Additional Sessions Judge has considered each and every point which has been urged before him. I find no merit in this petition, which is accordingly dismissed with this modification that the petitioner shall not undergo 3 sentence of imprisonment but shall liable to pay the compensation. July 28, 2010. (Dev Darshan Sud) (aks) Judge.