Dismissed

Sri Gonala Basavaraja S/O Gonala Veeranna v. Sri a Krishna Murthy S/O Late Sathya Narayana Shetty

Karnataka HC3 Sept 2024CRL.P/101849/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An accused convicted under Section 138 of the NI Act challenged a suspension-of-sentence condition requiring deposit of 25% of the cheque amount, pleading hardship as a farmer, but citing the Supreme Court's Jamboo Bhandari decision on exceptional circumstances, the High Court found none and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

None granted.

Sri Gonala Basavaraja S/O Gonala Veeranna Vs Sri a… — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:12691 CRL.P No. 101849 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101849 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. GONALA BASAVARAJA S/O. GONALA VEERANNA, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST CUM PROPRIETOR OF GANGADARA TRADERS, R/O: AYYANAHALLI VILLAGE, KOTTUR TALUKA, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT-591222.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. D.V.PATTAR, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

SRI. A. KRISHNA MURTHY S/O. LATE SATHYA NARAYANA SHETTY, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST CUM BUSINESSMEN, R/O: 7^TH WARD, RENUKA ROAD, KOTTUR TOWN, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT-591222.

¶12

…RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI. BASAVANA GOUD T, ADVOCATE)]

¶14

BHARATHI H M

¶15

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO RELAX THE CONDITION IMPOSED BY ORDER DATED 16.05.2024 PASSED BY THE 3^RD ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BALLARI SITTING AT: HOSAPETE VIDE ANNEXURE-D ON INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1/2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BY IMPOSING THE CONDITION TO BE DEPOSITED 25% OF THE CHEQUE AMOUNT IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.5043/2024 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶17

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

¶18

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12691 CRL.P No. 101849 of 2024

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

This petition is filed by petitioner-accused/appellant seeking relaxation of condition imposed by order dated 16.05.2024 passed by III Addl. District and Session Judge, Bellary sitting at Hosapete in Crl.A.No.5043/2024 and on Interim application No.1/2024 imposing the condition to deposit 25% of the cheque amount.

¶22

The petitioner has been convicted for offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act and he has been sentenced to pay fine of Rs.22,00,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The said judgment of conviction has been challenged by petitioner in Crl.A.No.5043/2024. The petitioner filed I.A.No.1 seeking suspension of sentence. While allowing the said I.A.No.1, the appellate Court imposed a condition on the petitioner to deposit 25% of the cheque amount. The said condition has been challenged in this petition.

¶23

The learned counsel for petitioner would contend that the petitioner is a farmer and therefore, he is not able to

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12691 CRL.P No. 101849 of 2024

¶25

comply the said condition and the condition is causing hardship to the petitioner.

¶26

The learned counsel for respondent would

¶27

contend that the cheque has been issued with regard to business transaction which itself indicate that petitioner is not a farmer and he is doing business. With this, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

¶28

Having heard learned counsel, the Court has

¶29

perused the impugned order and other materials placed on record.

¶30

As per decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Jamboo Bhandari V/s Madhya Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation Limited and Others¹ , only if the petitioner-accused makes out exceptional circumstances, he can seek exemption from depositing 25% of the cheque amount imposed as a condition for suspension of sentence. In the case on hand, the ground urged is that the petitioner is a farmer.

¶31

1 SCC(2023)10 SCC 446

¶32

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12691 CRL.P No. 101849 of 2024

¶33

On perusal of the judgment passed by the learned

¶34

Magistrate, the transaction between the petitioner and respondent is a business transaction. Therefore, the said contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is a farmer and condition of deposit of 25% of cheque amount is causing hardship cannot be accepted. Even though, the petitioner is a farmer he has not made out any other ground, being a farmer he is unable to comply the said condition.

¶35

Considering all these aspects, petitioner has not made out any exceptional grounds seeking exemption to comply the condition of deposit of 25% of the cheque amount as imposed by the appellate Court.

¶36

In view of the same, the following:

¶37

ORDER

¶38

The petition is dismissed.

¶39

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶40

RKM CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 78

Sri Gonala Basavaraja S/O Gonala Veeranna v. Sri a Krishna Murthy S/O Late Sathya Narayana Shetty

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Gonala Basavaraja S/O Gonala Veeranna v. Sri a Krishna Murthy S/O Late Sathya Narayana Shetty

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

Sameer S/O. Mohammed Yousuf Betageri Vs the State of Karnataka

Shivakumara Gutteppa Talavar S/O Gutteppa Vs State of Karnataka

P. Hulugeppa @ Hulugesh @ Nagesh Vs the State

Shri Girmallappa Vs Shri Ningappa

Sri. Uliveppa S/O Veerappa @ Irappa Rotti Vs the State of Karnataka

Raju S/O Shaabu Karakaramundi Vs the State of Karnataka