Disposed

Babu Reddy M v. Paramesh v

Karnataka HC18 Sept 2024CRL.RP/646/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Conviction under Section 138 NI Act was compounded: parties filed a joint memo recording full and final settlement, the accused deposited the fine amount of Rs.8,70,000/-, and the court permitted compounding, set aside the trial and appellate convictions, acquitted the accused, and allowed the complainant to withdraw the deposit.

What did the court decide?

Offence compounded; convictions set aside; petitioner acquitted; respondent permitted to withdraw Rs.8,70,000/- deposited; bail bond cancelled.

Babu Reddy M Vs Paramesh v — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:39177 CRL.RP No. 646 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 646 OF 2021 (397(Cr.PC) / 438(BNSS))

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

BABU REDDY M S/O T MUNIREDDY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/A NO.7, BABU NILAYA, KARUMARIAMMA TEMPLE ROAD, WHITEFIELD, BANGALORE - 560 066.

¶8

Digitally signed by ANJALI M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶9

R/AT NO.7, BABU NILAYA, SREE LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA PRASANNA, KINGSSTON ROAD, WHITEFIELD, BENGALURU - 560 066. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAKSHITH R., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND: PARAMESH V S/O LATE VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/A BELATHUR COLONY, KADUGODI POST, OM SHAKTHI TEMPLE ROAD - 567 067. (BY SMT. BRINDA A S., ADVOCATE)

¶11

…RESPONDENT

¶12

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:39177 CRL.RP No. 646 of 2021

¶13

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION DATED 04.12.2018 PASSED BY THE A.C.J.M., BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT IN C.C.NO.7800/2016 AND CONFIRMED BY THE VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL, BANGALORE IN CRL.A.NO.2/2019 BY ITS JUDGMENT DATED 08.03.2021 AND ACQUIT THE PETITIONER.

¶14

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶15

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶16

ORAL ORDER

¶17

Sri R.Rakshith, learned counsel for petitioner and Smt.

¶18

Brinda A.S, learned counsel for respondent along with their respective parties are present before the Court. The parties are identified by their respective counsels.

¶19

This petition is filed by the petitioner, who was an accused before the trial Court, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 08.03.2021 passed in Crl.A.No.2/2019 by VI Additional Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, confirming the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 04.12.2018 passed in C.C.No.7800/2016 by the Additional Chief Judicial

¶20

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:39177 CRL.RP No. 646 of 2021

¶21

Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, whereby the trial Court convicted the petitioner-accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'the N.I.Act') and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.8,70,000/-, in default of payment of fine, the accused to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months, out of the fine amount, a sum of Rs.8,65,000/- was ordered to be paid as compensation to the respondent-complainant and the remaining amount of Rs.5,000/- was ordered to be remitted to the State.

¶22

During the course of arguments, the parties have agreed to settle the matter between themselves amicably. To this effect, learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a joint memo for compounding the offence. The terms therein reads as under:

¶23

"1. It is submitted that the accused who is the revision petitioner in the above case has deposited the entire fine amount of Rs.8,70,000/- imposed by the trial court in

¶24

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:39177 CRL.RP No. 646 of 2021

¶25

CC.7800/2016 vide order dated 04.12.2018. The said fine amount is deposited before the I Addl Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore by way of demand draft.

¶26

2. It is submitted that the respondent/complainant has acknowledged the same and he may be permitted to withdraw the fine amount which he is entitled for.”

¶27

As per the aforementioned terms stipulated in

¶28

the joint memo, the petitioner has agreed to pay a total amount of Rs.8,70,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs Seventy Thousand Only) to the respondent-complainant as a full and final settlement and the respondent-complainant has agreed for the same.

¶29

The parties, who are present before the Court, are enquired by the Court as to whether compounding of the offence has been taken place on their own free will and consent, which is answered in the affirmative, stating that there is no force or coercion imposed on them. They have signed the joint memo voluntarily.

¶30

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:39177 CRL.RP No. 646 of 2021

¶31

The petitioner-accused does not have any

¶32

objections to the respondent withdrawing the amount deposited before the trial Court.

¶33

The respondent-complainant does not have any objections in the petitioner being acquitted of all charges for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

¶34

In view of the settlement arrived at between the

¶35

parties by way of the compounding of offence, the offence made out against the petitioner-accused is permitted to be compounded. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶36

ORDER

¶37

i) This Criminal Revision Petition is hereby disposed off in terms of the settlement agreement;

¶38

ii) The joint memo filed by the petitioner/accused is taken on record ;

¶39

iii) The judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 04.12.2018 passed in CC.No.7800/2016 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru and confirmed in the judgment

¶40

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:39177 CRL.RP No. 646 of 2021

¶41

dated 08.03.2021 passed in Crl.A.No.2/2019 by VI Additional Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru are hereby setaside, as the parties have compounded the offence;

¶42

iv) The respondent-complainant is permitted to withdraw the amount deposited by the petitioner-accused before the trial Court;

¶43

v) The trial Court shall disburse the amount deposited by the petitioner-accused in favour of the respondent-complainant by way of electronic transfer upon respondentcomplainant furnishing relevant Bank details and on proper identification;

¶44

vi) In view of compounding of offence, the petitioner-accused is acquitted of all the charges for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I.Act;

¶45

vii) The bail bond executed by the petitioneraccused stands cancelled;

¶46

viii) Ordered accordingly.

¶47

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶48

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33

¶49

Babu Reddy M v. Paramesh v

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Reddy M v. Paramesh v

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

Chaluva Murthy Vs Yashoda

M/S Kalsanka Gowri Silks Vs Chandra Kailash Varma

Sri H.R. Ganapathi Vs Sri K v Dinesh

H P Vasantha Vs B N Devaraju

Sri. D E Raghunath Vs Sri. N B Chowda Reddy

Balakrishna @ Balu Vs the State of Karnataka by