1. Complaint Case No. : 4206/10 2. Name of the complainant : M/s Citi Financial Consumer Finance India Ltd., 3 L.S.C. Pushp Vihar, New Delhi­110062 3. Name of the accused and his : Sh. Shiv Ratan parentage and residence H. No. 1108, Block L 2, Street No. 24, Sangam Vihar, Delhi­110025 4. Offence complained of or proved: U/s 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 5. Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty 6. Final Order : Accused convicted 7. Date of Order : 05.01.2012 2 CC No. 4206/10 BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE 1. The brief facts of the case are that the Complainant is a Limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its registered office at Delhi. Mr. Sanjeev Sharma is the Authorized Representative of the Complainant company who has been authorized to sign, file and institute the present complainant on behalf of the complainant company in terms of Power of Attorney executed on 04.08.2009. 2. It is stated in the complaint that the accused Shiv Ratan has availed a personal loan vide agreement No. 14458723 from the complainant company and in consideration to absolve the liability arising out of the said loan, the accused issued a cheque bearing no. 772513 dated 04.08.2010 drawn on Punjab National Bank, Khanpur, New Delhi­110062 for an amount of Rs.100,000/­ i.e. Ex.CW1/2 and when the said cheque was presented for encashment was returned back with remark 'insufficient funds' vide return memos dated 07.08.2010 i.e., Ex. CW1/3. A legal demand notice which is Ex. CW1/4 dated 21.08.2010 was sent by the complainant company through its lawyer which was duly served on the accused vide Speed Post receipt dated 27.08.2010 i.e. Ex.CW1/5 and that the accused failed to make the payment within the statutory period of 15 days and hence this criminal complaint was filed by the complainant. 3. Upon service of Bailable Warrants, the accused put his 3 CC No. 4206/10 appearance firstly before the court and was admitted to bail on 25.07.2011. Notice was framed against the accused person on 15.09.2011 to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. EVIDENCE 4. To support its case, the complainant company examined CW1­ Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, AR of the Complainant company on 02.11.2011 and 29.11.2011. 5. CW1 tendered his evidence by way of affidavit and reiterated the contents of the complaint and relied upon the documents filed at the stage of pre­summoning evidence. During the cross­ examination CW1 stated that the accused had availed a personal loan of Rs.100,000/­ in February 2008 which was repayable in 48 installments of Rs.4000/­ each. However, no loan document has been placed on record and also denied that the acceded had not handed over four blank cheques to the complainant company and that no loan amount was ever disbursed to the accused. CW1 also stated that he did not know that who filled up the details in the cheque in question and admitted that the name of the addressee on the cheque in question has been filled up with rubber stamp of the complainant company. CW1 stated that the accused had till date paid 7 installments of Rs.4000/­ each and the outstanding balance pending against the accused as on the date of issuance of legal demand notice was more than Rs.100000/­. CW1 also stated that 4