Allowed

Smt R Vanitha v. Sri K Ramaraju

Karnataka HC13 Dec 2021CRL.RP/1182/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The solitary judge allowed the criminal revision petition after the parties filed a joint memo stating their dispute was settled. The court quashed the lower court judgments, acquitted the petitioner, and permitted the withdrawal of court deposits as part of the settlement.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner acquitted; lower judgments set aside; respondent permitted to withdraw court deposit and additional settlement amounts paid.

Smt R Vanitha Vs Sri K Ramaraju — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

¶5

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1182 OF 2021

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Smt. R.Vanitha W/o Late S.N.Dorai, Aged about 51 years, R/at No.11, 2^nd Main Road, 4^th Cross, Basaveshwara Layout, Bengaluru-560094.

¶8

…Petitioner

¶9

(By Sri M.R.Rajagopal, Advocate)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Sri K.Ramaraju, S/o Late Syamaraju, Aged about 57 years, R/at No.18, Hebbala, Saravar Layout, Sahakaranagar Post, Bengaluru-560092.

¶12

…Respondent (By Sri M.B.Shankaregowda, Advocate)

¶13

This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397 read with 401 of Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the order date 23.02.2021 on the application filed under Section 391 of Cr.P.C. and the judgment dated 23.02.2021 both passed by the learned LXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in Crl.A.No.1727/2017 and also the judgment dated 09.11.2017 passed by the Learned XVIII ACMM, Bengaluru in C.C.No.3369/2016 and etc.

¶14

:: 2 ::

¶15

This Criminal Revision Petition coming on for admission this day, the Court made the following:

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Sri M.R.Rajagopal, learned counsel for the petitioner is present. Sri M.B.Shankaregowda, Advocate files vakalath for respondent now.

¶18

The petitioner and the respondent are present before the Court in person and they have filed a joint memo stating that the dispute between them has been settled and therefore this revision petition may be disposed of in terms of the joint memo.

¶19

The joint memo shows that the trial Court sentenced the petitioner to pay fine of Rs.7,51,000/-. Now the respondent is agreeable for receiving a total sum of Rs.5,50,000/- towards final settlement. Today, Rs.1,00,000/- (One Lakh) is paid by way of cash and Rs.3,75,000/- (Three Lakhs Seventy-five Thousand) by way of demand draft bearing No.729349 dated 09.12.2021 drawn

¶20

:: 3 ::

¶21

on Canara Bank, Lottegollahalli Branch, Bengaluru, in favour of the respondent. Another sum of Rs.75,000/- (Seventy-five Thousand) is available in the Court deposit and the petitioner says no objection for withdrawal of the said amount by the respondent.

¶22

Since the parties have arrived at a settlement and the respondent is agreeable for compounding of the offence, the joint memo is placed on record. Compounding is permitted. Hence the following:

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Revision petition is allowed.

¶25

The judgment dated 09.11.2017 passed in C.C.No.3369/2016 by the XVIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru is set aside.

¶26

The judgment dated 23.02.2021 passed in Crl.A.No.1727/2017 by the LXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru is set-aside. The petitioner is

¶27

:: 4 ::

¶28

acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

¶29

The respondent is permitted to withdraw Rs.75,000/- deposited by the petitioner in the Court of XVIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, in connection with C.C.No.3369/2016.

¶30

Sd/JUDGE

¶31

Kmv/-

Smt R Vanitha v. Sri K Ramaraju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt R Vanitha v. Sri K Ramaraju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri R S Kulakarni Vs Sri v Raju

Ramesh @ Ekamabram Vs State of Karnataka

Mukkatira Neeth Aiyappa Vs the State by Ponnampet P S

Sri Kemparaju Vs State of Karnataka

Andanaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

Harisha @ Harish M Vs State of Karnataka