Allowed

Sri Nagaraj B v. Sri Satish R

Karnataka HC14 Nov 2022CRL.A/1270/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act case was allowed. The High Court set aside the trial court's order due to failure to provide reasonable opportunity for cross-examination. The complaint was restored to the file for cross-examination of the complainant.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment and order dated 15.04.2019 set aside. Complaint restored to file for cross-examination of PW-1.

Sri Nagaraj B Vs Sri Satish R — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1270 OF 2019

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI NAGARAJ B S/O LATE BOREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT NO.25, 7^TH MAIN, 7^TH CROSS, 4^TH BLOCK NANDINI LAYOUT BENGALURU - 560 096.

¶8

…COMPLAINANT/APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. LINGARAJ M, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

SRI SATISH R S/O RANGANATH AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT NO.1, JODISRIRANGAPURA HUNAVINAD POST HOSADURGA TALUK, CHITRADURGA - 577 527.

¶12

...ACCUSED/RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH N D, ADVOCATE)

¶14

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 15.04.2019 IN C.C.NO.2127/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ADDL. SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXXI ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY, AND CONVICT THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SEC 138 OF THE N I ACT AND AWARD THE SENTENCE

¶15

¶16

AND COMPENSATION AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.

¶17

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

This appeal is by complainant challenging the dismissal of the complaint filed by him for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and thereby acquitting the respondent/accused.

¶20

For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to by their rank before the trial Court.

¶21

Complainant filed complaint under Section 200

¶22

of Cr.P.C alleging that he and accused are well acquainted and on 13.12.2015, accused has borrowed a sum of Rs.9,50,000/- to meet his domestic problems and after repeated request and demand, he issued a cheque dated 11.11.2016 for a sum of Rs.9,50,000/- and when it was presented for encashment, it was dishonoured on the ground of insufficient funds. After issue of legal notice, he filed this complaint.

¶23

¶24

Since accused pleaded not guilty, complainant examined himself as PW-1 and got marked Exhibits P-1 to P-4. After noting that inspite of granting several adjournments, PW-1 has not tendered himself for crossexamination, the trial Court has closed the complainant's evidence and after recording the evidence of accused, it has dismissed the complaint.

¶25

As evident from the order sheet, on 19.01.2019, accused has appeared and secured bail. On the same day, he has filed application to permit him to cross-examine PW-1, which came to be allowed and the case was posted to 31.01.2019, 22.02.2019, 16.03.2019 and 08.04.2019. On that day, i.e., on 08.04.2019, after noting that PW-1 has not tendered himself for crossexamination, closed complainant's evidence. On the same day, he has recorded the statement of accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C and also recorded defence evidence and posted the case for judgment.

¶26

The manner in which the case was closed on

¶27

the same day by closing the evidence of complainant's

¶28

¶29

side recording the statement of accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C and also recording the evidence of accused goes to show that complainant has not been provided with reasonable opportunity. When on 08.04.2019, complainant and his counsel were absent, they had no occasion to know the developments that took place and file application to recall PW-1 as well as to provide opportunity to cross-examine the accused. In a very hurried manner, the trial Court has proceeded to dispose of the matter. In the circumstances, the complainant requires another opportunity to tender himself for crossexamination and also to lead to further evidence, if he so desires.

¶30

No prejudice would be caused to the accused as he would get opportunity to cross-examine the complainant and his witnesses. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶31

¶32

ORDER

¶33

(i) Appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 15.04.2019 is set aside. Complaint is restored to the file.

¶34

(ii) Both Complainant and accused are directed to appear before the trial Court on 12.12.2022 without waiting for notice from it.

¶35

(iii) The trial Court is directed to proceed with the matter from the stage of cross-examination of PW-1 after providing reasonable opportunity to both parties.

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

MDS

Sri Nagaraj B v. Sri Satish R

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Nagaraj B v. Sri Satish R

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

M Nagaraju Vs S Ramaswamy

Sri Mallemahadeswara Kshethra Vs Sri Jayaramu

Sri B Raghavendra Reddy Vs Sri a Arputharaj

Sri D R Shivashankar Reddy Vs Sri v Narayanaswamy

Sri K M Mahadevappa Vs Sri K.N Revanasiddappa

K Ramu Vs C Bannaiah