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. Appeal No. 1507 of 2014 Dismissed_15.07.2024 N.I. Act fugitive to 2 count

Present

Mr. Justice Sheikh Abdul Awal

Criminal Appeal No. 1507 of 2014

                  Md. Azizul Hoque

.............Convict-appellant. -Versus-

The State and another

                                                             ............Respondents.

No one appears

      .....For the convict-appellant.

Ms. Shahida Khatoon, D.A.G with

Ms. Sabina Perven, A.A.G with,

Ms. Koheenoor Akter, A.A.G.

               ............. For the respondent No.1          No one appears

   ............. For the respondent No.2

Judgment on 15.07.2024.

Sheikh Abdul Awal, J:

This  criminal  appeal  at  the  instance  of  convict appellant,  Md.  Azizul  Hoque  is  directed  against  the impugned judgment and order of conviction and Sentence dated  02.02.2014  passed  by  the  learned  Sessions  Judge, Sirajgonj in Sessions Case No. 338 of 2012 arising out of C.R. Case No. 27 of 2012 (Sadar) convicting the accused appellant under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentencing him thereunder to suffer rigorous


1

imprisonment for a period of 01 (one) year and to pay a fine of  Tk.  21,00,000/-(Twenty  one  Lac)  in  default  to  suffer simple imprisonment for 3 (three) months more.

 The gist of the case is that one, Md. Anower Hossen as complainant filed a petition of complaint being C.R. Case No. 27 of 2012 (Sadar) in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial  Magistrate,  Cognizance  Court  No.1,  Sirajgonj against  the  convict-appellant  under  section  138  of  the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 stating, inter-alia, that out of   previous  good  relationship  with  the  complainant  the convict  appellant  took  loan  amounting  to  Tk.  7,00,000/- (seven  lac)   on  18.02.2011  from  the  complainant  for business purpose with a condition to refund the said amount within 6 months and thereafter, on 26.10.2011 the accused to pay the loan amount issued a cheque being No. S.B. 10/0 No. 7245915 amounting to Tk. 7,00,000/-(seven Lac) of Pubali Bank Ltd. Sirajgonj in favour of the complainant respondent No.2  and  thereafter,  the  complainant  presented  the  said cheque before bank on 16.11.2011 for encashment but the said cheque was dishonoured for insufficient of fund and thereafter, the complainant sent a legal notice through his Advocate to the accused appellant on 11.12.2011 asking him to pay the cheque’s amount within 30 days but the accused- appellant did not pay any heed to it and hence , the case. 

On receipt of the petition of complaint, the learned  Chief  Judicial  Magistrate,  Sirajgonj  examined  the

complainant under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 29.01.2012 and took cognizance against the  accused-appellant  under  section  138  of  the Negotiable  Instrument  Act,  1881  and  issued  summon against him fixing next date on 23.02.2012.

In usual  course the case  record  was sent to the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Sirajgonj for trial wherein the case was registered as Sessions Case No. 338 of 2012. Ultimately the accused appellant was put on trial to answer a charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 to which the accused- appellant pleaded not guilty and prayed to be tried.

At the trial the complainant himself was examined as PW-1 and also exhibited some documents to prove its case while the defence examined none.

On conclusion of trial, the learned Sessions Judge, Sirajgonj  by  the  impugned  judgment  and  order  dated 02.02.2014  found  the  accused  appellant  guilty  under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced  him  thereunder  to  suffer  rigorous imprisonment for a period of 01 (one) year and to pay a fine of Tk. 21,00,000/-(Taka Twenty one Lac) in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 (three) months more.

  Aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned judgment and order  of  conviction  and  sentence  dated  02.02.2014,  the convict-appellant preferred this criminal appeal.

No one found present to press the appeal on repeated calls  inspite  of  fact  that  this  criminal  appeal  has  been appearing in the list for hearing with the name of the learned Advocate for the appellant for days together.

In view of the fact that this petty old criminal appeal arising out of 01 (one) year sentence under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 has been dragging before this Court for more than 10 years, I am inclined to dispose of it on merit as per evidence and materials on record.

On perusal of record, it is found that the complainant after exhausting all the legal formalities filed C.R. Case No. 27  of  2012  (Sadar)  under  section  138  of  the  Negotiable Instruments  Act,  1881  against  the  convict  appellant  and during trial the complainant himself was examined as PW-1 and exhibited some documents to prove its case.

To constitute an offence under Section 138 of the NI Act, the following elements need to be fulfilled:

  1. A cheque should have been issued by the payer for

the discharge of a debt or other liability.

  1. The cheque should have been presented or deposited

by the payee within a period of six months from the date of


drawing of the cheque or within the period of validity of the cheque, whichever is earlier.

  1. The payee should have issued a notice in writing to

the payer within 30 days of receipt of information regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid from the bank.

  1. The payer/ drawer of the cheque should have paid

the cheque amount within 30 days of receipt of the said notice from the payee.

  1. If the payer is failed to pay in time the cheque

amount, the payee should have filed a complaint within one month.

On an overall consideration of the facts, circumstances and the materials on record, it can be easily suggested that all the above quoted key elements are exist in the present case. Besides, it appears from the record that a single bench of this Court at the time of admission of appeal by order dated 07.04.2014 granted bail to the convict-appellant for a period  of  06(six)  months,  which  was  lastly  extended  on 22.02.2016 for a period of 01(one) year and thereafter, no one took any steps to extend the order of bail, as a result of  which,  the  said  bail  was  expired  long  before  on 22.02.2017.  Therefore,  in  the  attending  facts  and circumstances of the case, I find no difficulty whatever in holding that the convict-appellant is a fugitive from law and justice.

In the case of Anti-Corruption Commission Vs. Dr. HBM Iqbal Alamgir, reported in 15 BLC (AD) 44, it has been held that the Court would not act in aid of an accused person, who is a fugitive from law and justice.

On an analyses of impugned judgment and order of conviction  and sentence dated  02.02.2014,  passed  by  the learned  Sessions  Judge,  Sirajgonj,  I  find  no  flaw  in  the reasonings of the trial Court or any ground to assail the same inasmuch  as  all  the  key  elements  of  Section  138  of Negotiable Instruments Act are exist in the case.

The learned Sessions Judge, Sirajgonj appears to have considered all the material aspects of the case and justly found the accused appellant guilty under Section 138 of the Negotiable  Instrument  Act,  1881  and  sentenced  him thereunder to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of 01 (one) year and to pay a fine of Tk. 21,00,000/-(Twenty one Lac) only.

On the above, 2 (two) counts, this appeal must fail.  

In the result, the appeal is dismissed. The impugned judgment  and  order  of  conviction  and  Sentence  dated 02.02.2014 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirajgonj in Sessions Case No. 338 of 2012 arising out of C.R. Case No. 27 of 2012 (Sadar) against  the accused appellant is hereby affirmed.

Since the appeal is dismissed the convict appellant,           Md. Azizul Hoque is directed to surrender his bail bond within 3 (three) months from today to suffer his sentence, failing which the Trial Court concerned shall take necessary

steps to secure arrest against him.

The complainant, Md. Anower Hossen, is permitted to withdraw half of the cheque’s amount as deposited in the Trial  Court  by  the  convict-appellant  for  the  purpose  of preferring this Criminal Appeal.

Send down the lower Court records at once.