Allowed

Sri Amarnarayana Babu v. Smt Saraswathamma

Karnataka HC16 Feb 2023CRL.RP/105/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision petition challenges a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The High Court allowed the petition after the parties filed an application agreeing to settle the dispute. Consequently, the offence was compounded, and the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence was set aside, acquitting the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition allowed; impugned judgments setting aside; offence compounded; petitioner acquitted and set free; payment of graded costs dispensed with.

Sri Amarnarayana Babu Vs Smt Saraswathamma — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

CRL.RP No. 105 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 105 OF 2019

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. AMARNARAYANA BABU SON OF K. PUTTAMUNINANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, NO.343/C, WEST COLONY, RWF QUARTERS, YELAHANKA BANGALORE - 560064.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. S.M. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

SMT. SARASWATHAMMA WIFE OF V. KRISHNAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, NO.14, 1^ST CROSS, 1^ST MAIN, GANDHINAGAR EXTENSION, KHB COLONY, YELAHANKA OLD TOWN, BANGALORE-560 064.

¶14

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. N. DEVARAJ, ADVOCATE)

¶15

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 READ WITH SECTION 401 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 05.02.2016 PASSED IN C.C.NO.17473/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE XVIII ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE AND CONFIRMED BY THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.12.2018 IN CRL.A.NO.184/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE LX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-61), BENGALURU AND DISMISS THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT/RESPONDENT.

¶16

¶17

CRL.RP No. 105 of 2019

¶18

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

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This revision petition is filed challenging the Judgment of conviction dated 05.02.2016 passed by the XVIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, (for short, ‘the Trial Court’) in C.C. No.17473/2013 by which the petitioner was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘the N.I. Act’) and sentenced to pay fine of Rs.90,000/-. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the Judgment dated 15.12.2018 passed by the LX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in Crl.A. No.184/2016 by which the Judgment of conviction passed by the Trial Court was confirmed, however, the sentence was modified directing the petitioner to pay fine of Rs.4,00,000/- for the aforesaid offence.

¶21

When this revision petition was listed for admission, the parties have filed an application in I.A. No.1/2023 under Section 147 of the N.I. Act agreeing to settle the dispute at a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- in full and final settlement of the amount payable under the cheque in question. It is stated that the

¶22

3 - CRL.RP No. 105 of 2019

¶23

petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- in C.C. No.17473/2013 before the Trial Court. Out of the same, a sum of Rs.13,500/- was already withdrawn by the respondent and the petitioner has no objection for the respondent to withdraw the sum of Rs.1,86,500/- deposited in the aforesaid case. It is further stated that the petitioner shall deposit the balance sum of Rs.50,000/- into the Savings Bank Account Number mentioned in the application at the Bharath Co-operative Bank Limited, Yelahanka, Bengaluru, on or before 28.02.2023.

¶24

In view of the fact that the compromise entered into between the between the parties is just and proper, I.A No.1/2023 is allowed. Consequently, the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act committed by the petitioner is compounded. Consequently, this revision petition is allowed. The impugned Judgment of conviction dated 05.02.2016 passed by the XVIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, in C.C. No.17473/2013 is set aside. Likewise, the Judgment passed by the LX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in Crl.A. No.184/2016 is set aside. The petitioner is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and he is set free.

¶25

¶26

CRL.RP No. 105 of 2019

¶27

The payment of graded cost as per the judgment of

¶28

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu

¶29

vs. Sayed Babalal H [AIR 2010 SC 1907] is dispensed with

¶30

in view of the difficulties pleaded by the petitioner/accused.

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

SMA

¶33

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8

Sri Amarnarayana Babu v. Smt Saraswathamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Amarnarayana Babu v. Smt Saraswathamma

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

Azmath Vs State by Thalaku Police Station

Smt Priya L Vs Sri Harender Keerthi Bds

Smt Indrani D H Vs Sri M Chandrashekar

Sri G Umesh Vs Sri Somashekar

Nazeer Ulla Vs Jagadeesh. S. J.

Mrs Jamuna K P Vs Mr v B Krishna