Allowed

Mr U K Venkatesh v. Mr K N Sreenivasa

Karnataka HC2 Jan 2023CRL.RP/688/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Revision petition filed under Section 397 Cr.P.C. against conviction and fine. Petitioner deposited cheque amount with grant of 15% graded cost. Court allowed compounding and set aside lower court judgments.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of by compounding; impugned judgment, appellate judgment, and sentence set aside; Respondent permitted to withdraw deposited amount.

Mr U K Venkatesh Vs Mr K N Sreenivasa — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

CRL.RP No. 688 of 2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 688 OF 2018

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR.U.K.VENKATESH S/O MR.ANGADI KENCHAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT UPPARARA STREET HOLEHONNUR POST BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 227.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI.PRAKASH K.A., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

MR.K.N.SREENIVASA S/O LATE NAGAPPAIAH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT KESARAGUTTI POST BHARATHIPURA POST THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 432.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

(BY SRI. PRADEEP H.S., ADVOCATE)

¶16

THIS CRL.R.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.06.2016 PASSED IN C.C.NO.224/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, THIRTHAHALLI CONVICTING THIS PETITIONER HEREIN TO UNDERGO S.I FOR 2 MONTHS AND ALSO TO PAY A FINE OF RS.50,000/- AND EXAMINE THE LEGALITY, PROPRIETY AND CORRECTNESS OF THE CONVICTION PASSED THEREON AND ETC.

¶17

¶18

CRL.RP No. 688 of 2018

¶19

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

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The present petition arises out of the concurrent judgment and order sentencing the petitioner for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has deposited the entire cheque amount before the trial Court. He has also filed a memo enclosing a demand draft for a sum of Rs.6,000/- being 15% of the graded cost as ordered by the Appellate Court in the case of DAMODAR S. PRABHU VS.

¶23

SAYED. BABALAL H. reported in AIR 2010 SC 1907 .

¶24

Learned counsel for the respondent admits that the petitioner has deposited the entire cheque amount and that he has no objection for compounding the offence committed by the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, subject to he being permitted to withdraw the amount deposited before the Trial Court.

¶25

¶26

CRL.RP No. 688 of 2018

¶27

In view of the aforesaid submission, the revision petition is disposed off compounding the offence committed by the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Consequently, the judgment dated 21.06.2016 passed by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Thirthahalli in C.C.No.224/2005 and the judgment dated 18.03.2017 passed by the III Additional Sessions Judge, Shivamogga in Crl.A.No.69/2016 is set aside and the sentence awarded by the Trial Court is also set aside.

¶28

The respondent is at liberty to withdraw the amount deposited by the petitioner before the trial Court.

¶29

NR/-

¶30

Sd/JUDGE

¶31

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23

Mr U K Venkatesh v. Mr K N Sreenivasa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr U K Venkatesh v. Mr K N Sreenivasa

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

M/S Ashed Valmark Vs State of Karnataka

Sri C P Subash Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. G.Nagappa Vs State of Karnataka

K. Raja Vs v. Prabhakar

Gold Coins Hotels and Resorts Limited Vs Sri Mohammed Nissar

Sri Girish Kumar a C Vs Smt Hemavathy