- (1.)Assailing the judgment dtd. 23/2/2010 in Crl.A.No.110 of 2008 on the file of the Court of learned III Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Bhimavaram, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the judgment dtd. 15/4/2008 in C.C.No.12 of 2007 on the file of the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhimavaram, for the offence under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as "N.I.Act"), the petitioner/accused filed the present criminal revision case under Sec. 397 r/w.401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C.").
(2.)The revision case was admitted on 25/2/2010 and the sentence of imprisonment imposed against the petitioner was suspended, vide orders in Crl.R.C.M.P.No.547 of 2010.
(3.)The shorn of necessary facts are that:
i) . The complainant M/s.Sundaram Finance Limited has been doing finance business and its sister concern Lakshmi General Finance is having branch at Bhimavaram. Petitioner/accused was approached the said Lakshmi General finance and availed finance of Rs.4,50,000.00 for purchase of lorry on hire purpose. The said amount was paid to him by way of cheque for Rs.1,75,000.00 drawn in his favour and the remaining amount of Rs.2,75,000.00 by way of cheque drawn in favour of P.Muralikrishnam Raju, who is authorized agent of the accused.

ii) . Petitioner and the said Lakshmi General Finance have entered into a bilateral agreement dtd. 3/12/2004. According to which, accused has to pay the loan amount along with interest within thirty-five (35) equal installments and one R.Ramakrishnam Raju stood as guarantor for such transaction.

iii) . The said Lakshmi General Finance Company was amalgamated into the complainant company and it was upheld by the High Court of Judicature of Madras on 25/2/2005. Thereby, the complainant company is authorized to recover the balance amount from the petitioner. On being made a demand by the complainant for repayment of balance, the petitioner has issued a cheque for Rs.2,49,119.00 on 15/11/2006 drawn on Bank of Baroda Bhimavaram branch towards part payment of the balance due.

iv) . Subsequently, the said cheque was presented by the complainant in its account in Indian Overseas Bank, Bhimavaram and it was returned by the petitioner back with a memo dtd. 17/11/2006 as account closed and the same was informed to the complainant by its banker with a memo dtd. 18/11/2006. Then the complainant got issued a legal notice to the petitioner, but the said notice was returned as 'person not available'. Hence, the complaint.