Dismissed

Sri. Srinivas M Sanidhi v. Sri. M Anand Kumar

Karnataka HC25 Nov 2022CRL.A/962/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal appeal against acquittal under Section 138 of N.I.Act abated upon the death of the respondent/accused. The court rejected an application to bring the legal representative on record, distinguishing precedents involving appeals against conviction, and dismissed the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Application I.A.No.1/2022 rejected; appeal dismissed as abated.

Sri. Srinivas M Sanidhi Vs Sri. M Anand Kumar — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.962 OF 2019

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI SRINIVAS M SANIDHI S/O HOODI MUNIYAPPA @ MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT NO.83/106, 4^TH CROSS, 1^ST MAIN, KUNDALAHALLI, MARATHAHALLI POST, BENGALURU - 560 037. (BY SRI. C.VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶9

... COMPLAINANT/APPELLANT

¶10

AND

¶11

SRI. M ANAND KUMAR S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT NO.53, 8^TH CROSS, BDS NAGAR, K NARAYANAPURA, BENGALURU - 560 077 AND ALSO AT NO.29, LAKSHMI NARASIMHA SWAMY NILAYA, GROUND FLOOR, PRASHANTHI NAGAR, SHIVARAMAKARANTH POST K NARAYANA PURA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 077.

¶12

.... ACCUSED/RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI. K.P.BHUVAN, ADVOCATE)

¶14

THIS APPEAL FILED U/S 378(4) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN C.C.NO.35300/2014 ON THE FILE OF XVIII ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY, SET ASIDE

¶15

¶16

THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 25.04.2019 PASSED THEREIN AND PUNISH THE RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.

¶17

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

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

Appellant has filed I.A.No.1/2022 to bring the wife of respondent on record as his legal representative.

¶20

In support of the application, the learned counsel for appellant has relied upon the two judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M.Abbas Haji Vs. T.N.Channakeshava¹ (Abbas Haji's case) and Crl.A.No.77/2020 dated 21.01.2020 Ramesan (dead) through LR Girija A Vs. State of Kerala² ( Ramesan's case).

¶21

This appeal is by complainant challenging the acquittal of respondent/accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I.Act.

¶22

On 07.02.2022, learned counsel for respondent has filed memo reporting death of respondent on 16.01.2022.

¶23

1 (2019) 9 SCC 606

¶24

2 (2020) 3 SCC 45

¶25

¶26

Since the appeal is against acquittal, question of brining the legal representative of respondent on record would not arise for consideration.

¶27

In Abbas Haji's case, accused was acquitted by the trial Court. However, High Court allowed the appeal and convicted the accused. It was challenged by his LRs before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court permitted LRs of the original accused to file the appeal for the limited purpose of establishing that the original accused was not guilty of the offences alleged. However, the present appeal is against acquittal of the accused. In the light of specific provision of Section 394(1) Cr.P.C, the appeal abates with the death of the accused.

¶28

In Ramesan's case, the trial Court convicted the accused and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment and pay fine. He challenged the same before the High Court. During the pendency of the appeal accused died and his Legal representatives were brought on record. High Court upheld the conviction and since accused is no more it observed that the sentence of imprisonment has become unworkable, but confirmed the sentence of fine. It was

¶29

¶30

challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the findings of the High Court that since it was an appeal against conviction, also involving imposition of fine, the appeal did not abate. However, only on the ground that LRs were not provided with opportunity, it remanded the case to High Court. As evident from these facts the appeal before Hon'ble Supreme Court is arising out of conviction of the accused by the trial Court as well as the High Court and the imposition of sentence also includes fine and therefore the appeal survived for consideration even after death of accused. Since the present appeal is against the acquittal of the accused, with his death it abates. Hence, question of bringing his LRs on record would not arise.

¶31

Therefore, the above two decisions are not applicable to the case on hand.

¶32

In the light of the above discussion, I.A.No.1/2022 is

¶33

rejected. Consequently, appeal is dismissed as abated.

¶34

Sd/JUDGE

¶35

Sri. Srinivas M Sanidhi v. Sri. M Anand Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Srinivas M Sanidhi v. Sri. M Anand Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt B Saraswathi Vs Smt Vasanthi

The State of Karnataka Vs Kenchappa Rayappa Yettingud

Krishna Venkatrman Bhat Vs Ganesh Subray Hegde

Sri K T Nagabhushunam Vs Smt. K C Kavitha

Sri Nagaraju Vs Sri Battaiah

M/S Deepak Sahakari Bank Limited Vs Sri Shyama M