Allowed

Mr. Bharath Raj R v. Mrs. M Latha

Karnataka HC25 Mar 2024CRL.A/1550/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the complainant's appeal against acquittal, holding that the trial court failed to provide reasonable opportunity to complete cross-examination after the production of additional documents. The impugned order was set aside and the case remanded for decision in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; impugned judgment set aside; case remanded for decision after providing reasonable opportunity to complete cross-examination; cost of Rs.10,000/- imposed on appellant.

Mr. Bharath Raj R Vs Mrs. M Latha — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

CRL.A No. 1550 of 2022 NC: 2024:KHC:12116

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1550 OF 2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. BHARATH RAJ R S/O RAJASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.26, 2^ND CROSS, 4^TH MAIN, SMG LAYOUT, HALASURU, BENGALURU - 560 008 PRESENT ADDRESS R/AT NO.9/1, HANUMAYYA REDDY ROAD, NEAR GANDHARVA BAKERY, HALASURU, BENGALURU - 560 008.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. UDAYA SHANKAR RAI P, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

MRS. M LATHA W/O VENKATA REDDY, MAJOR, R/AT NO.11, 3^RD FLOOR, SHIVA SAI NILAYA, HANUMAYYA REDDY ROAD, NEXT HOUSE OF MAHAVEERA BUTTON CENTRE, HALASURU, BENGLAURU - 560 008.

¶14

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. AMEENULLA N K, ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO a) SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.06.2022 MADE IN C.C.NO.50722/2017 PASSED BY THE XXXIV ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU AND CONVICT THE ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE; b) GRANT SUCH OTHER ORDER AS DEEM FIT TO

¶15

¶16

CRL.A No. 1550 of 2022 NC: 2024:KHC:12116

¶17

MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE.

¶18

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

Being aggrieved by the dismissal of the complaint

¶21

filed by him under Section 200 Cr.P.C against the respondent/accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument (for short "N.I. Act"), appellant who is complainant has filed this appeal under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C.

¶22

For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to by their rank before the trial Court.

¶23

It is the case of the complainant that for celebrating the marriage of his daughter accused borrowed a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from the complainant with a promise to repay within two years. When he failed to keep

¶24

up with his promise, on request and demand, he issued cheque dated 29.10.2015 for Rs.5,00,000/-. However, presented for encashment it was returned dishounoured as

¶25

3 - CRL.A No. 1550 of 2022 NC: 2024:KHC:12116

¶26

"Funds insufficient". After issuing legal notice and on failure of accused to pay the amount due under cheque, complaint is filed.

¶27

The accused appeared before the trial Court and contested the matter by pleading not guilty and the case was posted for complainant's evidence. In fact complainant examined himself as PW-1 and got marked Ex.P1 to 6. He is partly cross-examined, wherein his financial capacity was challenged. In fact accused filed application under Section 91 of Cr.P.C to direct the complainant to produce certain documents, which came to be allowed. Accordingly, the complainant produced the documents on 05.03.2022. Due to miscommunication, he could not present for further cross-examination. Therefore, the trial Court proceeded to close the case and passed the impugned judgment and order acquitting the accused. The trial Court has not provided sufficient opportunity to the complainant to tender himself for cross-examination and hence the appeal.

¶28

¶29

CRL.A No. 1550 of 2022 NC: 2024:KHC:12116

¶30

After due service of notice, respondent/accused

¶31

has appeared through counsel and contested the matter.

¶32

Heard and perused the record.

¶33

Thus, complainant prosecuted the accused on

¶34

the allegations that the cheque issued by accused towards repayment of a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- came to be dishonoured for funds insufficient. The complainant was partly cross-examined. In fact as per the application filed by the accused, complainant produced additional documents which were to be marked and complainant was to be further cross-examined and at this stage, complaint was dismissed. He is having a good case on merit.

¶35

The complainant has not produced order sheet to examine whether he was provided with reasonable opportunity to prosecute the complaint. However, in para15 of the impugned judgment and order, the trial Court has noted that despite directions, the complainant has not produced the additional documents and he has also not tendered himself for cross-examination and therefore, at

¶36

¶37

CRL.A No. 1550 of 2022 NC: 2024:KHC:12116

¶38

this stage, the trial Court has closed the complainant's

¶39

evidence and proceeded to dispose of the case by dismissing the complaint. Having regard to the fact that the additional documents are not marked and the

¶40

complainant is not fully cross-examined, this Court is of the considered opinion that complainant is entitled for reasonable opportunity to prove his case. The accused should also be given opportunity to further cross-examine the complainant, also with regard to additional documents produced by the complainant. It would not cause any prejudice to the accused as he would get an opportunity to defend himself and accordingly, the following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

(i) Appeal is allowed, subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- to the accused before the trial Court.

¶43

(ii) The impugned order dated 02.06.2022 passed in C.C.No.50722/2017 on the file of XXXIV ACMM, Bengaluru is set aside.

¶44

¶45

CRL.A No. 1550 of 2022 NC: 2024:KHC:12116

¶46

(ii) The complainant and accused are directed

¶47

to appear before the trial Court on 18.04.2024 without waiting for further notice from the trial Court.

¶48

(iii) The trial Court is directed to decide the case in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to both parties.

¶49

(iv) Of course, if on 18.04.2024, respondent/accused fails to appear before the Court, the trial Court is at liberty to take coercive steps against him for

¶50

securing his presence.

¶51

Sd/JUDGE

¶52

¶53

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53

Mr. Bharath Raj R v. Mrs. M Latha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Bharath Raj R v. Mrs. M Latha

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

Bhaskar Reddy Vs Roshini

Smt Nirmala S Ramadurga Vs Sri Gurupadayya G Hiremath

Smt Sujatha Vs Sri Srinivas

Corporation Bank Vs Leena D Souza

Elan Professional Vs M/S Crown Culinax Pvt. Ltd.

Mr Ramakrishna Vs Abdul Khadar I