In this criminal revision, the Karnataka High Court dismissed the petition seeking to set aside conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonoured cheque. The court held the petitioner failed to rebut the presumption under Section 139, making the conviction just and proper.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4308 CRL.RP No. 100014 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100014 OF 2022 (397)
BETWEEN:
SAGAR BASHA GAVALI AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: PVT. SERVICE, R/O 118, MANGALWAR PETH, TILAKWADI, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI YASH R. NADKARNI, FOR SRI. VITHAL S. TELI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
ANNAPURNA CHINNAPPA DANDAGAL
SHREENIKA CHITFUNDS PVT. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS RECOVERY OFFICER , PARVEZ SIKANDAR CHIKKODI, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE, R/O VEERBHADRA NAGAR, TQ AND DIST: BELAGAVI.
…RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT SERVED)
Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA CHINNAPPA DANDAGAL Date: 2024.02.23 10:25:31 +0530
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 397(1) R/W SEC.401 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.08.2021 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.346/2019 BY THE VIII ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI WHEREIN CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2019 PASSED BY THE VIII- JMFC, BELAGAVI IN CC NO.807/2017, IN SO FAR AS CONVICTION AND MODIFYING WITH REGARD TO DEFAULT SENTENCE AND IMPOSING OF FINCE AMOUNT, FOR OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 138 OF NI ACT AND THEREBY ACQUIT THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED AND ANY OTHER RELIEFS.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4308 CRL.RP No. 100014 of 2022
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
remained unrepresented before this Court.
case, the petitioner after entering appearance before the
Trial Court had claimed to be tried. The
respondent/complainant in order to prove its case had examined one witness as P.W.1 and he also got marked 06 documents as Exs.P1 to P6. On behalf of the defence, petitioner had examined himself as DW.1 and also got marked 04 documents as Exs.D.1 to D.4. The Trial Court after hearing the arguments addressed on both side vide the impugned judgment and order dated 04.07.2019 had convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I.Act and sentenced him to pay fine of Rs.85,000/and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year. The said judgment and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court was confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.346/2019 before the Court of VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, on 31.08.2021. However, the Appellate Court modified the sentence and reduced the fine amount to Rs.75,000/- and default sentence was reduced to six months imprisonment. Being aggrieved by the said
judgment and order passed by the Courts below, petitioner is before this Court.
dishonoured by the drawee bank with a shara ‘insufficient funds’.
against the petitioner after complying all the requirements of the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act. In the said proceedings, the petitioner has not disputed the signature found in the cheque. He also has not disputed that the cheque in question was issued on the account maintained by him in Cosmos Bank, Tilakwadi, Belagavi District. He also has not disputed the transaction with the respondent-Bank and he also has not disputed that he was the subscriber to the chit that was conducted by the respondent. Therefore, a presumption under Section 139 of the N.I.Act arises against the petitioner. Unless the said presumption under Section 139 of the N.I.Act is rebutted successfully by the accused by raising a probable defence, the accused would be liable to be punished for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act.
Sd/JUDGE
AC/KK CT:GSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29
3 issues framed by the court
No interface party to the crime is punishable for an offence under section 138 of the N.I.Act.
Presence of the cheque in the account of the accused raised a presumption under section 139 of the N.I.Act.
The petitioner did not rebut the presumption arising under section 139 of the N.I.Act.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
SAGAR BASHA GAVALI
ANNAPURNA CHINNAPPA DANDAGAL; SHREENIKA CHITFUNDS PVT. LTD.
S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
