Revision petition against conviction under Section 138 NI Act for dishonoured cheque; appellate court had reduced fine to Rs.85,000/-. Court held that as the petitioner neither cross-examined P.W.1 nor produced rebuttal evidence, there was no perversity warranting revisional interference, and dismissed the petition.
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:13602 CRL.RP No. 1134 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1134 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI B.M.KUSHALAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by SHARANYA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. MARIO NOEL D ROZARIO, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT BEING PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.509/2016 PASSED ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, LII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE, DATED 19.06.2018 AND THE JUDGMENT BEING PASSED IN C.C.NO.3692/2011 DATED 06.02.2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XIII A.C.M.M., BANGALORE.
NC: 2024:KHC:13602 CRL.RP No. 1134 of 2018
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned counsel for the respondent.
modified the judgment and ordered to pay fine of Rs.85,000/-. Out of that, an amount of Rs.80,000/- is payable to the complainant and an amount of Rs.5,000/- shall vest with the State. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present revision petition is filed before this Court.
NC: 2024:KHC:13602 CRL.RP No. 1134 of 2018
appeal, the Appellate Court modified the judgment of the Trial Court and directed to pay an amount of Rs.85,000/- i.e., the Cheque amount of Rs.80,000/- and fine of Rs.5,000/- to vest with the State and the same has not been complied.
and the learned counsel for the respondent, this Court can exercise the revisional powers, if the case of the complainant is rebutted either by way of effective cross-examination of P.W.1 and by leading any rebuttable evidence by the revision petitioner and the same has not been done. Hence, the question of exercising revisional powers does not arise. The revisional powers can be exercised only if any perversity is found in assessing the evidence available on record. When the evidence of the complainant is not disputed and rebutted by the revision petitioner, the question of exercising the revisional powers does not arise. Hence, I do not find any ground to entertain this petition and apart from that, the Appellate Court re-assessed the material available on record and reduced the fine amount from Rs.1,50,000/- to Rs.85,000/- taking note of the Cheque amount of Rs.80,000/-. Hence, I do not find any ground to exercise the revisional powers.
NC: 2024:KHC:13602 CRL.RP No. 1134 of 2018
following:
ORDER
The criminal revision petition is dismissed.
Sd/JUDGE
MD
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16
1 issue framed by the court
Whether revisional powers could be exercised where the accused failed to rebut the complainant's evidence by cross-examination or counter-evidence.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Girish Kumar B.G.
Sri Edward D'Souza, Proprietor, M/s. Dawn Infotech
H.P. Sandesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
