1 Cr.Revn. 586/09 Amk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 586 OF 2009 Ashok C. Mehta .. Applicant Vs. K. S. Abdul Sattar & Anr. .. Respondents. Mrs. Yogini Gurav for the Applicant. Mrs. A. A. Mane APP for the Respondent No.2 State. CORAM : MRS. R. S. DALVI, J. DATE : 2nd December, 2009. P.C. 1. The applicant has challenged the order of Principal Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Greater Bombay dated 28.07.2009 which has maintained the conviction of the accused- applicant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as per the order of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 33rd Court, Ballard Pier, Mumbai. 2. There have been two transactions of cheques. One cheque for Rs.5 lacs has been fully paid. That complaint has been withdrawn. One cheque of Rs.5.90 lacs was not paid. The 2 Cr.Revn. 586/09 accused-applicant did not attend the trial. NBW was issued. He stated that he was ill and hospitalized. That was not proved. Hence, that application was rejected. Despite that he did not attend the trial. He did not cross-examine the complainant. 3. In his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he stated that, he has paid substantial amount and will pay balance within 2-3 weeks. 4. Accused made payment of Rs.60,000/-. Thereafter the complainant stated that Rs.1, 40,000/- was due to be paid. This was pending the Appeal No. 343 of 2006 before the Sessions Court. Thereafter, at the time of the admission of the appeal and his application for bail, the applicant deposited Rs.75,000/-. No further amount is paid. Hence, taking into account the liability of Rs.1,40,000/-, Rs.65,000/- still remains due on payable. 5. Due to the persistent default of the applicant compensation of Rs.2 lakhs was granted. Hence, Rs. 60,000/- is by way of additional compensation. 3 Cr.Revn. 586/09 6. Total liability is therefore Rs.65,000/- of the unpaid balance and Rs.60,000/- towards compensation. 7. The complainant has been driven to file the complaint, to prosecute the complaint, to issue NBW and thereafter not to be paid despite admission. Even after the order of payment of compensation and the rejection of the appeal and the direction to pay Rs.1,25,000/- which is for unpaid balance of Rs.65,000/- and the compensation of Rs.60,000/-, the applicant has not paid any further amount. 8. The Revision Application completely lacks bonafides. Absolutely no irregularity in the impugned order is seen. 9. The Revision Application is dismissed. The applicant shall taken in custody if payment of Rs.1,40,000/- is not made forthwith. (R. S. DALVI, J.)