Dismissed¶51

M/S Classic Fincorp Reg v. Sri Chitti Babu K

Karnataka HC8 Oct 2025CRL.A/60/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru (NC: 2025:KHC:39787) — CRL.A No. 60 of 2025 (A), decided 08.10.2025 by Justice G Basavaraja, heard on admission — M/s Classic Fincorp v. Chitti Babu K. — appeal under S.378(4) Cr.P.C. / S.419(4) BNSS against acquittal under S.138 Negotiable Instruments Act in C.C.No.17956/2023 (XXV ACJM Bengaluru, 07.11.2024) — dishonoured cheque of Rs.10,04,273/- endorsed 'funds insufficient' — re-appreciation found no error or legal infirmity in the acquittal — appeal dismissed.

What did the court decide?

On re-appreciation of the evidence, this Court finds no error or legal infirmity in the interim judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court; the acquittal therefore stands and the appeal fails. ¶49

M/S Classic Fincorp Reg Vs Sri Chitti Babu K — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:39787 CRL.A No. 60 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.60 OF 2025 (A)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

M/S CLASSIC FINCORP REG. HAVING ITS REGD.OFFICE AT NO.2080, GROUND FLOOR, 38TH CROSS, EAST END B MAIN ROAD, 9^th BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 069. REP. BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY SRI. AGNYEA, SHETTY, S/O DINAKARA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. JEEVAN K., ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AND:

¶14

SRI CHITTI BABU K., S/O KRISHNAPPA, CARRYING ON BUSINESS AT JAIVIK ENTERPRISES, NO.38, 1ST FLOOR, ANJANEYA SWAMY MAIN ROAD, CHANNAPPA LAYOUT, OPP. TO MORE MEGA STORE, MAHADEVAPURA, BENGALURU-560 048

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. BHASKAR C.R., ADVOCATE)

¶17

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:39787 CRL.A No. 60 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 378(4) CR.P.C. (FILED U/S 419(4) BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND THE ORDER OF ACQUITTAL PASSED BY THE LEARNED XXV ACJM AT BENGALURU IN C.C. NO.17956/2023 DATED 07.11.2024 AND MAY BE PLEASED TO CONVICT THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S/ 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT.

¶21

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN ADMISSION , AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶24

Heard on the admission of the matter.

¶25

The appellant-M/s Classic Fincorp has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by the XXV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore in C.C.No.17956/2023 dated 07.11.2024.

¶26

For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their status before the trial Court.

¶27

The brief facts leading to this appeal are that the complainant being the registered finance corporation has lent the loan to the accused and his friends namely

¶28

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:39787 CRL.A No. 60 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

Gajendra Kumar S., Rohitha A.B., M.C. Yadav Kumar and accused friend Gajendra Kumar's mother N.Jaya and obtained on demand promissory note, consideration receipt and undertaking letter, loan application, Form No.6 and etc. Accused friends Rohitha A.B., M.C. Yadav Kumar and Gajendra Kumar's mother N.Jaya are the guarantors for prompt repayment of the said loan obtained by one Gajendra Kumar. But all of them failed to clear the loan. Towards repayment of the said loan, accused issued a cheque bearing No.685250 dated 27.04.2023 drawn on State Bank of India, Subbaiah Layout Branch, Bangalore for a sum of Rs.10,04,273/-. The said cheque on presentation, returned with an endorsement 'funds insufficient'.

¶32

On 23.05.2023, complainant got issued legal notice through his Advocate. Same was served on the accused on 29.05.2023. There was no reply given by the accused. Hence, the complainant filed the complaint. After taking cognizance, the Trial Court issued summons to the

¶33

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:39787 CRL.A No. 60 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

accused. In response to the summons, accused appeared

¶37

before the Court and statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C Statement was recorded. Accused pleaded not guilty and therefore, trial was held.

¶38

To prove the case of the complainant, one witness was examined as P.W.1 and documents got marked as Exs.P.1 to P.27. On closure of the evidence of the complainant, statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded. The accused has denied the evidence of PW.1. In the statement, he has stated that the complainant assured for granting of loan amount but did not sanction. Without sanctioning of loan they have taken the cheque towards ECS payment.

¶39

On perusal of the materials, the Trial Court had acquitted the accused. It is the case of the complainant that the accused is not a principal debtor and is only a guarantor. The document produced by the complainant reveals that the complainant had lent a loan to the principal debtor on 28.11.2022. On demand promissory

¶40

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:39787 CRL.A No. 60 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

note and consideration receipt marked at Exs.P.24 & 25 reveals that the principal debtors - Jaya and Chitti Babu jointly executed this consideration receipt on 25.11.2022.

¶43

Ex.27-statement of PL Account No.3736 reveals

¶44

that this statement is pertaining tE2o accused No.1Gajendra Kumar S., accused No.2 - N. Jaya, accused No.3 - Chitti Babu K., accused No.4 - Rohitha A.B. and accused No.5 - M.C. Yadav Kumar. The complainant has not placed any materials to show that the statement of P.L. Account No.3736 is pertaining to the Gajendra Kumar or of all above five persons.

¶45

The complainant has not deposed anything about on which date the complainant has demanded loan amount of Gajendra Kumar S. PW-1 has deposed that on 27.04.2023, accused had issued the cheque. If really the accused had issued the cheque on 27.04.2023, the complainant ought to have issued the challan. In respect of the cheque, as the complainant is a financial company has to maintain all the records and has to pay the money

¶46

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:39787 CRL.A No. 60 of 2025

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

through cash/cheque/DD etc. In the absence of said material evidence, the evidence of PW.1 cannot be accepted.

¶49

The Trial Court has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court and properly appreciated the evidence on record in accordance with law and facts and acquitted the accused. On re-appreciation of the evidence record, I do not find any error/legal infirmities in the interim judgment of the acquittal passed by the trial Court. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

¶50

ORDER

¶51

Appeal is dismissed .

¶52

Sd/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

¶53

TMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30

M/S Classic Fincorp Reg v. Sri Chitti Babu K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Classic Fincorp Reg v. Sri Chitti Babu K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Akkatayi W/O Ashok Naik Vs Smt. Sevanta W/O Saiduberad

Smt. Shaila W/O. Revanasiddappa Alias Revenappa Shivashimpi Vs Revanasiddappa Alias Revanappa S/O. Veerappa Shivashimpi

Sri Channabasappa S/O Shankarappa Benni Vs Sri Basaveshwar Dharma Fund Samsthe

Malleshappa @ Mallesha Vs State of Karnataka

Sri S Suganchand Vs Sru B M Sadashivaiah

Sri Muniramaiah Vs State by