Introduction:

In the case of Rangaswamy AND Ravi Kumar, the Karnataka High Court upheld the conviction of the petitioner, Rangaswamy, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The case arose from the dishonour of a cheque issued by the petitioner to the complainant, Ravi Kumar, for a loan repayment. Despite the petitioner’s defense, the court found the complainant’s evidence credible and rejected the petitioner’s plea challenging the conviction.

Arguments of Both Sides:

Advocate Harish Babu K N, representing the petitioner, argued that the trial court overlooked the non-service of notice, a mandatory requirement under Section 138(b) of the Act. The petitioner also contested the existence of a legally recoverable debt, questioning the lack of documentary evidence from the respondent to prove the loan transaction. However, Advocate Prasanna V R HCGP, for the respondent, justified the conviction by highlighting the petitioner’s failure to rebut the presumption of guilt. The respondent argued that mere denial of the transaction was insufficient to disprove the complainant’s claims.

Court’s Judgment:

Justice S Rachaiah, in dismissing the petition, emphasized the principle that the accused must present cogent evidence to rebut the presumption of guilt. The court rejected the petitioner’s defense of cheque misuse by another individual, noting the absence of supporting documentation. Consequently, the court affirmed the trial court’s decision, concluding that the petitioner’s defense was not credible, and inferred that he indeed transacted with the complainant and issued the cheque in question.