In a criminal appeal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. concerning cheque dishonour, the court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn after the parties filed a joint memo confirming mutual settlement and payment of the disputed cheque amount by the respondent.
Criminal Appeal dismissed as withdrawn.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1387 OF 2017 (A)
BETWEEN:
SMT MANGALA GOWRI, W/O LATE G. SRINIVAS, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.58 4TH MAIN ROAD, 1ST PHASE, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, MANJUNATHANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 026. ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI RAJESHWARI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI MUTHURAJ, S/O GANGANNA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.1, 8TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN, BAPUJINAGAR, MYSORE ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 026. …RESPONDENT
(BY SRI NAGARAJA M, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 18.07.2017 PASSED BY THE XIII A.C.M.M., BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.4849/2016 – ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I.ACT.
2
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE:
ORDER
The appellant, respondent and their respective counsels have filed a joint memo, wherein it is stated that they have mutually settled their dispute and the respondent has paid the disputed cheque amount to the appellant.
the joint memo is placed on record.
withdrawn.
Sd/JUDGE
SJ
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal appeal be allowed in view of mutual settlement and payment of disputed cheque amount.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Smt Mangala Gowri
Sri Muthuraj
Ashok G. Nijagannavar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
