দায়বর্জন বিবৃতি (DISCLAIMER)

এই ওয়েবসাইটে প্রকাশিত রায় বা আদেশ আপনি google translation এর মাধ্যমে বাংলায় দেখতে পাচ্ছেন তা সুপ্রীম কোর্ট কর্তৃক বাংলায় অনূদিত নয়। জনসাধারণের বিচার-প্রক্রিয়ায় সহজ অভিগম্যতা নিশ্চিতকরণের অভিপ্রায়ে বাংলায় অনূদিত রায়-আদেশ দেখার ব্যবস্থা রাখা হয়েছে। অনূদিত রায় বা আদেশের অনুলিপি সইমোহরী/জাবেদা নকলের (certified copy) বিকল্প হিসেবে অথবা অন্য কোন উদ্দেশ্যে ব্যবহার করা যাবে না। রায় ও আদেশ বাস্তবায়নের ক্ষেত্রে মামলার নথিতে বিধৃত মূল রায় বা আদেশ প্রণিধানযোগ্য।
Microsoft Word - Crl. Rev. 1832 of 2021 _NI Act_ _15.02.24_ _Compromise_ _Disposed of_

1

Present:

Mr. Justice Md. Shohrowardi

Criminal Revision No. 1832 of 2021

Md. Iqbal Hossain Mojumder (Ex-Chairman)

...Convict-petitioner

          -Versus-

Md. Shamser Alam and another

...Opposite parties

Mr. Md. Omar Faruk, Advocate

...For the convict-petitioner

Mr. Alamgir Hossain, Advocate  

...For the complainant-opposite party Heard on 04.12.2023, 05.12.2023 and 05.02.2024  

Judgment delivered on 15.02.2024

On an application filed under Section 439 read with Section 435 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 Rule was issued calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why the impugned judgment and  order  dated  28.08.2019  passed  by  Sessions  Judge.  Cumilla  in Criminal Appeal No. 24 of 2019 affirming the judgment and order of conviction  and  sentence  dated  29.05.2017 passed by  Joint Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Cumilla in Session Case No. 2205 of 2016 arising out of Debiddar Thana C.R. No. 378 of 2015 convicting the petitioner under  Section  138  of  the  Negotiable  Instruments  Act,  1881  and sentencing him thereunder to suffer imprisonment for 01(one) year and to pay fine of Tk. 15,00,000, in default, to suffer imprisonment for 03(three) months more should not be set aside and/or such other or further order or orders passed as to this Court may seem fit and proper.

The prosecution case, in short, is that on 07.06.2015 the accused Md. Iqbal Hossain Majumder issued Cheque No. 1391632 drawn on his Account No. 021001053 maintained with Bangladesh Commerce Bank Ltd,  Cumilla  Zilla  School  Branch,  Cumilla  for  payment  of  Tk. 15,00,000 in favour of the complainant. The complainant presented the cheque on 11.08.2015 for encashment but the same was dishonoured


with a remark ‘insufficient funds’. After that, he send a legal notice on 24.08.2015 to the accused for payment of the cheque amount. Although the notice was served upon the accused, he did not pay the cheque amount. Consequently, on 06.10.2015 the complainant filed the case.

After  filing  the  complaint  petition,  the  complainant  was examined under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 and  the  learned  Magistrate  was  pleased  to  take  cognizance  of  the offence  against  the  accused  under  Section  138  of  the  Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The case record was sent to the Sessions Judge, Cumilla for trial and the case was registered as Sessions Case No. 2205 of  2016.  The  Sessions  Judge,  Cumilla  sent  the  case  to  the  Joint Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Cumilla for disposal.

On  16.11.2016,  the  charge  was  framed  against  the  accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 which was read over to the accused and he pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried following law. The complainant examined 1(one) witness  to  prove  the  charge.  During  the  trial,  the  accused  was absconding and did not cross-examine P.W. 1.

After concluding the trial, the trial Court by judgment and order dated 29.05.2017 convicted the accused Md. Iqbal Hossain Mojumder under  Section  138  of  the  Negotiable  Instruments  Act,  1881  and sentenced him thereunder to suffer imprisonment for 1(one) year and fine of Tk. 15,00,000, in default, to suffer imprisonment for 3(three) months more against which the accused filed Criminal Appeal No. 24 of 2019 before the Sessions Judge, Cumilla. After hearing the appeal, the Sessions Judge, Cumilla by impugned judgment and order dated 28.08.2019 affirmed the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court. After that, the convict petitioner obtained the instant Rule.

P.W.  1  Md.  Shamser  Alam  stated  that  the  accused  issued cheque  No.  1391632  on  07.06.2015  for  payment  of  Tk.  15,00,000 drawn on his Account No. 021001053 maintained with Bangladesh Commerce Bank Ltd. The cheque was presented on 11.08.2015 for encashment  but  the  same  was  dishonoured  for  ‘insufficient  funds’. After that, the complainant issued a legal notice on 24.08.2015 for payment of the cheque amount but the accused did not pay the cheque amount. He stated that the complainant lived in Italy and authorised him by executing a power of attorney to file the case. He proved the complaint petition as exhibit 1 and his signature as exhibit 1/1. He proved the cheque as exhibit 2, dishonour slip as exhibit 3, legal notice as exhibit 4, postal receipt as exhibit 5 and power of attorney as exhibit 6. The defence declined to cross-examine P.W. 1.

Learned Advocate Mr. Md. Omar Faruk appearing on behalf of the convict-petitioner submits that both the convict-petitioner and the complainant-opposite  party  settled  the  dispute  out  of  Court  and executed  an  agreement  on  04.02.2024.  He  paid  the  entire  cheque amount to the complainant. He prayed to make the Rule absolute.

Learned Advocate Mr. Alamgir Hossain appearing on behalf of the  complainant-opposite  party  submits  that  the  accused  issued  the cheque for payment of Tk. 15,00,000 on 07.06.2015 but the same was dishonoured. After complying with all the legal procedures provided in Section  138  of  the  Negotiable  Instruments  Act,  1881  filed  the complaint  petition.  P.W.  1  proved  the  charge  against  the  accused beyond all reasonable doubt. He admitted that he received the entire cheque amount and settled the dispute out of Court.

I have considered the submission of the learned Advocates of both parties, perused evidence, the impugned judgments and orders passed by the Courts below and the records.

On perusal of the records, it appears that the defence did not cross-examine P.W. 1. Therefore, the evidence of P.W. 1 as regards the issuance  of  the  cheque  in  favour  of  the  complainant  remains uncontroverted. Learned Advocate Mr. Md. Omar Faruk appearing on behalf of the convict-petitioner did not dispute that the accused issued the cheque in favour of the complainant. The Negotiable Instruments


Act, 1881 is a special law and the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is not compoundable.

There is a presumption under Section 118(a) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 that every negotiable instrument was made or drawn for consideration, and that every such instrument, when it has been  accepted,  indorsed,  negotiated  or  transferred,  was  accepted, indorsed, negotiated or transferred for consideration. The presumption under  Section  118(a)  of  the  said  Act  is  rebuttable.  The  convict- petitioner neither adduced evidence nor cross-examined P.W. 1 to rebut the presumption under Section 118(a) of the said Act. Therefore I am of the view that the convict-petitioner Md. Iqbal Hossain Mojumder (Ex- Chairman)  issued  the  cheque  (exhibit  2)  in  favour  of  the  payee- complainant for consideration. After making a demand in writing under Section 138(1)(b) of the said Act, he did not pay the cheque amount. Thereby he committed an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the complainant filed the case following all procedures provided in Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The prosecution proved the charge against the convict-petitioner beyond  all  reasonable  doubt  and  the  Courts  below  on  proper assessment and evaluation of evidence legally passed the impugned judgments and orders.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and gravity of the offence, I am of the view that the ends of justice would be best served if the sentence passed by the Courts below is modified as under;

The  convict-petitioner  is  found  guilty  of  the  offence  under Section  138  of  the  Negotiable  Instruments  Act,  1881  and  he  is sentenced to pay a fine of Tk. 15,00,000 (fifteen lakh).

The complainant is entitled to get the fine amount.

In the result, the Rule is disposed of with modification of the sentence.


Since the complainant-opposite party admitted that he received the entire cheque amount from the convict-petitioner, he is not required to deposit the fine amount again.

Send down the lower Court’s records at once.