Allowed

Surendrababu v. M C Ramesh

Karnataka HC6 Feb 2023CRL.RP/95/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal revision petition challenging a conviction and sentence for cheque dishonour. The court accepted a joint settlement application where the petitioner paid the dues, compounded the offence, and set aside the conviction and sentence while ordering the release of deposited funds.

What did the court decide?

The judgment of conviction and sentence was set aside; the offence was compounded; deposited amount was ordered to be released to the respondent.

Surendrababu Vs M C Ramesh — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

CRL.RP No. 95 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 95 OF 2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SURENDRABABU S/O LATE SATHYANARAYANAIH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.17B/116, "AMULYA", RAMRAO LAYOUT, KATRIGUPPA, BSK III STAGE, BENGALURU-560085.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. VISHNUMURTHY, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

M.C.RAMESH S/O CHAKRAPANISHETTY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO.225/226, 8^TH MAIN, 1^ST BLOCK, JAYANAGARA, BENGALURU - 560011.

¶13

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAJAGOPAL T.R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI B.R.VISHWANATH, ADVOCATE) 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 OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE PASSED BY THE LEARNED XXI ADDITIONAL CMM, BENGALURU AGAINST THE APPELLANT IN C.C.NO.35070/2014 AND C.C.NO.35071 VIDE DATED 01.03.2016 AND ACQUIT THE APPELLANT.

¶14

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

¶15

¶16

CRL.RP No. 95 of 2023

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This revision petition is filed challenging the judgment of conviction dated 01.03.2016 passed by the XXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.Nos.35070/2014 and C.C.No.35071/2014 and the consequent sentence to pay fine of Rs.3,10,000/- and Rs.4,10,000/- respectively. The petitioner also challenged the judgment dated 22.12.2012 passed by the LXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH62) in Crl.A.No.403/2016.

¶19

The petitioner and the respondent have filed an application along with joint memo which is treated as an application under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It is stated in the joint memo that in terms of the settlement arrived at, the respondent has agreed to receive a sum of Rs.6,40,000/- towards full and final settlement of the amount payable under the cheques in question. Out of the said sum of Rs.6,40,000/-, a sum of Rs.72,000/- is already deposited before the trial Court and the petitioner has no objection for release of the said amount to the respondent and out of the further remaining amount of Rs.5,78,000/-, the petitioner has tendered cash of Rs.40,000/- to the respondent

¶20

¶21

CRL.RP No. 95 of 2023

¶22

and has paid the balance of Rs.5,28,000/- through three demand drafts, all dated 04.02.2023.

¶23

In view of the same, the joint memo is accepted and the revision petition is allowed. The offence committed by the petitioner under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is compounded. Consequently, the judgment of conviction dated 01.03.2016 passed by XXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.Nos.35070/2014 and 35071/2014 and the consequent sentence is set aside. The judgment of LXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-62), Bengaluru dated 22.12.2022 in Crl. Appeal No.403/2016 is also set aside.

¶24

The amount in deposit before the trial Court is ordered to be released in favour of the respondent.

¶25

Sd/JUDGE

¶26

KMV

¶27

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

Surendrababu v. M C Ramesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendrababu v. M C Ramesh

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

M/S. Jmj Agro Exports Vs M/S. Abc Enterprises

Tareeq Anwar Vs State of Karnataka

Sri C.V. Srinivasegowda Vs Sri M.L. Venkatesh

Ramu Vs Deputy Commissioner

Fareed Vs the State of Karnataka

T Natesh Vs State of Karnataka