Dismissed

Mrs. Seema Bhutada v. Mr. Suresh Sikchi

Karnataka HC2 Nov 2022CRL.P/6851/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a criminal petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to challenge the rejection of an application for expert opinion on a dishonored cheque memo by the trial court under Sections 138 NI Act and 45 Evidence Act.

What did the court decide?

The petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for expert opinion on the bank memo was dismissed. The trial court's order was upheld as there was no error.

Mrs. Seema Bhutada Vs Mr. Suresh Sikchi — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION No.6851 OF 2019

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MRS. SEEMA BHUTADA W/O. JAGMOHAN BHUTADA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS NO.205/A-9, 25TH CROSS 6TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 011.

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI SANTHOSH KUMAR M.B., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

MR. SURESH SIKCHI S/O. GANGABISAN AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS R/AT NO.C-706, MANTRI TRANQUIL GUBBALALA, BENGALURU - 560 061.

¶12

... RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI K.C. MAHESH, ADVOCATE)

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 29.07.2019 REJECTING THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 45 OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU IN C.C. NO.9800/2018 AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION DATED 22.07.2019 AND REFER

¶15

¶16

THE DOCUMENT EX.P2 FOR EXPERT OPINION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The respondent herein has initiated proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act read with Section 200 of Code of Criminal Procedure against the petitioner and the same is pending on the file of II Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru as C.C.No.9800/2018. In the course of the proceedings, the petitioner has filed an application before the trial Court under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with a prayer to refer Ex.P2, a memo issued by the Bank stating that the cheque presented by the respondent has been dishonored because the drawer i.e., petitioner herein, stopped the payment and also on the ground that it is not a original memo, but a colour xerox and the opinion of an

¶20

¶21

expert is required. The trial Court has passed the following:-

¶22

"Ex.P2 is issued by the Bank Official, whose evidence is sufficient, expert evidence which is not required, hence application filed by the accused is rejected."

¶23

The complainant filed Ex.P2. It is for him to prove the document in the manner known to law and if he fails to do so, it always enures to the benefit of the accused. Under the circumstances, it is for the trial Court to decide based on the facts as to whether a particular document has to be referred to an expert opinion or not. In the instant case, the complainant has produced Ex.P2, he has not executed the same. He has to prove the same in the manner known to law. The trial Court has come to the conclusion that the same being issued by the Bank Official, whose evidence is sufficient, and expert evidence is not required and has rejected the same.

¶24

I find no error in the order passed by the trial Court and accordingly, the petition is hereby dismissed .

¶25

¶26

In view of dismissal of the main petition, interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and the same is disposed of.

¶27

SD/JUDGE

¶28

VMB

Mrs. Seema Bhutada v. Mr. Suresh Sikchi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Seema Bhutada v. Mr. Suresh Sikchi

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 Narayanaswamy Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Thimakka Vs the State of Karnataka

Suresh Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Gangappa N Vs State of Karnataka

Mrs Indira K Devadas Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Suman Nair Vs State of Karnataka