Allowed

K R Mahesh Wodeyar S/O Revanaiah Wodeyar, v. Sree Amba Enterprises Represented by Its Manager

Karnataka HC8 Sept 2023CRL.RP/100276/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed the criminal revision petition under Section 397 CrPC in a cheque bounce case based on a compromise filed by the parties. The impugned judgment of conviction and sentence under Section 138 NI Act was set aside. The petitioner was acquitted.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed in terms of compromise; impugned judgment set aside; petitioner acquitted; bail bond cancelled.

K R Mahesh Wodeyar S/O Revanaiah Wodeyar, Vs Sree Amba… — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:10254 CRL.RP No. 100276 of 2015

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100276 OF 2015 (397-)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

K R MAHESH WODEYAR S/O REVANAIAH WODEYAR, AGE:40 YEARS, OCC:MERCHANT R/O:NEAR PETROL BUNK BEHIND NEW COURT COMPLEX, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI, DIST:TUMAKURU

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. J BASAVARAJ., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

SREE AMBA ENTERPRISES REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, SRI.SUDHEER YADAV S/O JORAWARSHINGH YADAV AGE:40 YEARS R/O:45/25 RADIO PARK, NEAR ZOO, COWL BAZAR DIST:BELLARY

¶12

CHANDRASHEKARLAXMANKATTIMANI Digitally signed byCHANDRASHEKARLAXMANKATTIMANIDate: 2023.09.12 14:47:03 +0530

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI. MRUTYUNJAYA S HALLIKERI.,ADVOCATE)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SESSIONS JUDGE, BALLARI IN CRL.A.NO.47/2014 AND ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, BALLARI IN C.C.NO.896/2008, PERUSE THE SAME AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE PASSED BY THE PRL. SESSIONS JUDGE, BELLARY IN CRL.A.NO.47/2014 DATED 30.10.2015 AND THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE PASSED BY THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC,

¶16

2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10254 CRL.RP No. 100276 of 2015

¶17

BALLARI IN C.C.NO.896/2008 DATED 30.9.2014 AND SET THE PETITIONER AT LIBERTY IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Sri.Shiva Shirur, learned counsel has filed NOC vakalath for respondent.

¶21

Petitioner/accused and the respondent/Manager of firm are present and both counsel are present.

¶22

Memorandum of the application under Section 147 of N.I. Act read with Section 320 of Cr.P.C. is filed and it is supported by the affidavits of the complainant/respondent. As per the compromise, respondent/Manager of the firm reported receipts of demand draft for Rs.7,00,000/- as detailed in the compromise petition.

¶23

It is also submitted that Rs.5,00,000/- is deposited before the trial Court and same has been withdrawn by the respondent/complainant-firm.

¶24

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:10254 CRL.RP No. 100276 of 2015

¶25

Both the parties admitted the compromise and

¶26

execution. The terms and conditions of the compromise are legal and equitable. Consequently, the compromise is accepted. In the light of the compromise, I proceed to pass the following:

¶27

ORDER

¶28

The criminal revision petitioner is allowed in terms of compromise.

¶29

The impugned judgment and order of the trial Court in C.C.No.896/2008 dated 30.09.2014, which is confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.47/2014 dated 30.10.2015, are set-aside.

¶30

The petitioner/accused is acquitted for the offences punishable under section 138 of N.I.Act.

¶31

Bail bond of petitioner/accused stands canceled.

¶32

ACList No.: 1 Sl No.: 45

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

K R Mahesh Wodeyar S/O Revanaiah Wodeyar, v. Sree Amba Enterprises Represented by Its Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K R Mahesh Wodeyar S/O Revanaiah Wodeyar, v. Sree Amba Enterprises Represented by Its Manager

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

Durgaraj S/O Kallappa Arasanal Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Gopinath S/O Narasimha Nayak Vs the State of Karnataka

Aman Mohammed S/O Haneef Shaikh Vs the State of Karnataka by

Sri Manjunath S/O Hulugappa Lamani Vs the State of Karnataka

Kumar S/O Malleshappa Basargi Vs State of Karnataka

Shri Kasappa Ramappa Karikolla Vs the State of Karnataka