Allowed

Lalith Bhandari v. Vasantlal S. Jain

Karnataka HC23 Jan 2023CRL.RP/1127/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision petition under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC, the Karnataka High Court examined a challenge to a conviction and sentence under Section 138 NI Act. Upon the filing of a Section 147 NI Act application regarding an amicable settlement with a sum of Rs.60,000/-, the court allowed the settlement, acquitted the petitioner, and set aside the impugned conviction and sentence.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner acquitted of offence under Section 138 NI Act; conviction and sentence set aside; fine of Rs.60,000/- ordered to be released to respondent; graded cost dispensed with due to petitioner's pa

Lalith Bhandari Vs Vasantlal S. Jain — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

CRL.RP No. 1127 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1127 OF 2019

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

LALITH BHANDARI S/O. LATE MISHRIMAL, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, C/O. AND P/F. M.M. SALES CORPORATION, NO.8, YADAV COMPLEX, B.M. GALLI, A.M. LANE CROSS, OPPOSITE PUBLIC ELECTRICALS, BANGALORE-560 053.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. GOPAL SINGH, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

VASANTLAL S. JAIN S/O. LATE SAKALCHAND, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/AT NO.426, FLAT NO.102, S.V. SHANTHANILAYA, 4^TH MAIN, SRINAGAR, NEAR JAIN TEMPLE, BANGALORE-560 050.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI. RAMESH P KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)

¶16

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 READ WITH SECTION 401 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS DATED 27.09.2018 IN CRL.A.NO.771/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE LXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY, (CCH:69), AS PER

¶17

¶18

CRL.RP No. 1127 of 2019

¶19

DOCUMENT NO.1, AND ALSO TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 15.05.2015 IN C.C.NO.21054/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE XII ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU AS PER DOCUMENT NO.2, AND TO ACQUIT THE PETITIONER OF THE CHARGE UNDER SECTION 38 OF N.I. ACT.

¶20

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

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioner has challenged the judgment of conviction dated 15.05.2015 passed by the XII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.No.21054/2014 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and consequent sentence to pay fine of Rs.3,50,000/- and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The petitioner has also called in question the judgment dated 27.09.2018 passed by the LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH - 69) in Crl.A.No.771/2015 by which, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Trial Court was upheld.

¶23

When this revision petition was listed for admission, the parties have filed an application under Section 147 of the

¶24

¶25

CRL.RP No. 1127 of 2019

¶26

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It is stated therein that the parties have amicably settled the dispute in terms of which, the respondent has agreed to receive a sum of Rs.60,000/- in full and final settlement of the dispute. The learned counsel petitioner submits that the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.60,000/- before the Appellate Court and the respondent may be permitted to withdraw the said amount towards full and final settlement.

¶27

In view of the settlement, application filed under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is allowed. Consequently, this revision petition is allowed . The offence committed by the petitioner punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is compounded. The petitioner is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Consequently, the judgment of conviction dated 15.05.2015 passed by the XII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.No.21054/2014 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and the consequent sentence, as well as the judgment dated

¶28

¶29

CRL.RP No. 1127 of 2019

¶30

27.09.2018 passed by the LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH - 69) in Crl.A.No.771/2015 are set aside.

¶31

The amount in deposit before the Sessions Court in Crl.A.No.771/2015 is ordered to be released in favour of the respondent. Since it is stated that the petitioner has suffered a paralytic stroke, the payment of graded cost as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

¶32

Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed Babalal H [AIR 2010 SC

¶33

1907] is dispensed with.

¶34

The Registry is directed to forthwith return the Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court records.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

PMR

¶37

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59

Lalith Bhandari v. Vasantlal S. Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalith Bhandari v. Vasantlal S. Jain

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

Sri. Suresh Vs State by Station House Officer

Smt Parvathi Vs the State of Karnataka

Syed Saifulla Vs Union of India by

Altaf Ahmed Vs Mrs Mariam Fasihuddin

Smt.Shobha T.R. Vs Ajaruddin

Smt. Pushpa Prabhakar Vs M/S Shriram Chits Karnataka Ltd.