Dismissed

Sri. Kodlu Ramakrishna v. Sri. v Srinath

Karnataka HC22 Feb 2023CRL.RP/369/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Revision Petition challenged a conviction and sentence for cheque dishonour under Section 138 NI Act. The High Court of Karnataka upheld the appellate judgment confirming conviction, modified the fine payment timeline, and affirmed the probation period.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted three months' time to pay fine in three monthly installments; in default, undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

Sri. Kodlu Ramakrishna Vs Sri. v Srinath — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

CRL.RP No. 369 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 369 OF 2019

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. KODLU RAMAKRISHNA S/O LATE HOOVAPPA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, NO.52, 2^ND MAIN ROAD, 3^RD CROSS, PRASHANTHI NAGAR, BIKASIPURA, ISRO LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 078.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

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

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

SRI. V. SRINATH S/O VENKATA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, NO.187, 1^ST FLOOR, 3^RD CROSS, 14^TH MAIN, HANUMANTHANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 019.

¶14

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MANJUNATH R., ADVOCATE)

¶15

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397(1) READ WITH SECTION 401 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.07.2017 PASSED BY THE XVIII A.C.M.M., BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.31771/2011 AND ORDER DATED 22.02.2019 IN CRL.A.NO.1042/2017 PASSED BY THE LXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE AND ACQUIT THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF THE N.I ACT.

¶16

¶17

CRL.RP No. 369 of 2019

¶18

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

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioner has challenged the Order dated 07.07.2017 passed by the XVIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, (for short, ‘the Trial Court’) in C.C. No.31771/2011 by which he 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.4,00,000/- and to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. The petitioner has also called in question the Judgment dated 22.02.2019 passed by the LXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, (for short, ‘the Appellate Court’) in Crl.A No.1042/2017, by which the said Judgment of conviction passed by the Trial Court was confirmed while the sentence passed by the Trial Court was modified and the petitioner/accused was sentenced to pay fine of Rs.2,25,000/-.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that notwithstanding the contentions urged by the petitioner, the petitioner would pay up the fine amount as ordered by the Appellate Court if reasonable time is granted.

¶22

3 - CRL.RP No. 369 of 2019

¶23

Learned counsel for the respondent has no

¶24

objection for the same.

¶25

In view of the above, the impugned Judgment dated 22.02.2019 passed by the LXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in Crl.A No.1042/2017 confirming the Judgment of conviction dated 07.07.2017 passed by the XVIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, in C.C. No.31771/2011 while modifying the sentence passed by the Trial Court is upheld and the petitioner is granted three months’ time from today to pay the fine amount in three monthly equated installments including the amount already deposited before the Trial Court and in default of payment of fine, the accused / petitioner herein shall undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

¶26

Accordingly, this revision petition is disposed off.

¶27

Sd/JUDGE

¶28

SMA

¶29

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24

Sri. Kodlu Ramakrishna v. Sri. v Srinath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Kodlu Ramakrishna v. Sri. v Srinath

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

Mr Nagendra Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Anil Kumar M K Vs Smt Yogamani

Sri. M.V. Krishnappa @ M.V. Krishna Vs Sri. B. Krishnamurthy Acharya

Inayathulla Vs the State by Bagepalli Police Station

Sri Mohammed Hafeez Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Krishnamraju.Y Vs Sri.Shanthappa Raju