Allowed¶47

Arjun Chandra v. Praveen Kumar K

Karnataka HC3 Nov 2025CRL.RP/1098/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC CRL.RP No.1098/2018 (decided 03.11.2025, Justice Ravi V Hosmani): Section 138 NI Act cheque dishonour case disposed of on compromise via joint memo; conviction dated 16.06.2016 in C.C.26576/2014 (XXII ACMM Bangalore) and appellate confirmation dated 07.09.2018 in Crl.A.795/2016 set aside; petitioner acquitted; settlement quantum Rs.3,15,000/- (Rs.1,75,000/- withdrawn from trial court deposit + Rs.1,40,000/- bank transfer); revision under Ss.397/401 CrPC allowed in terms of joint memo.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner acquitted for offences punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881; order of conviction and sentence dated 16.06.2016 (XXII ACMM, C.C.no.26576/2014) and confirmation dated 07.09.2018 (Crl.A.no.795/2016) set aside in terms of the joint memo. ¶47

Arjun Chandra Vs Praveen Kumar K — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶47

Issue for consideration

Whether the settlement recorded in the joint memo is lawful and may be accepted for disposal of the revision petition and setting aside of the conviction and sentence.

¶46

Court's answer

The terms of settlement in the joint memo were found to be lawful; the joint memo was taken on record and accepted.

¶46

Ratio / Principle

In view of the settlement, the revision petition is allowed in terms of the joint memo; the order of conviction and sentence dated 16.06.2016 in C.C.no.26576/2014 and its confirmation dated 07.09.2018 in Crl.A.no.795/2016 are set aside, and the petitioner is acquitted for offences punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Revision Petition under Sections 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C. challenging the conviction and sentence dated 16.06.2016 in C.C.No.26576/2014 (XXII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore) and its confirmation dated 07.09.2018 in Crl.A.No.795/2016 was disposed of on the strength of a joint memo recording an amicable settlement: the Complainant agreed to receive Rs.3,15,000/- as full and final settlement, comprising Rs.1,75,000/- already withdrawn from the 50% cheque amount deposited before the trial court and a balance of Rs.1,40,000/- transferred to his bank account. Both parties appeared, were identified by their respective counsel, and affirmed that the settlement was reached out of free will and volition without threat, coercion or inducement. Finding the terms lawful, the Court took the joint memo on record, accepted it, allowed the revision petition in terms of the joint memo, set aside both orders, and acquitted the petitioner for offences punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:44061 CRL.RP No. 1098 of 2018

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1098 OF 2018

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

ARJUN CHANDRA S/O G RAMACHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, NO 158, 8^TH A MAIN, FIRST CROSS, BTM 1^ST STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 029.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. NAGENDRA DIKSHIT S.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

PRAVEEN KUMAR K., S/O KALAPPA M AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS R/AT NO 13/4, 1^ST MAIN, MARENAHALLI, BEHIND MUNESHWARA TEMPLE, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 040.

¶14

(BY SRI. S HEMANTH BHARADWAJ.,ADVOCATE)

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DATED 16.06.2016 IN C.C.NO.26576/2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE XXII ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT, BANGALORE AND ORDER DATED 07.09.2018 PASSED IN CRL.APPEAL.NO.795/2016 PASSED BY LXIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-65).

¶17

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

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:44061 CRL.RP No. 1098 of 2018

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

Challenging order dated 07.09.2018 passed by VII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore City (CCH65), in Crl.A.no.795/2016 and also order dated 16.06.2016 passed by XXII ACMM, Bangalore City in C.C.no.26576/2014, this Revision Petition is filed.

¶24

Learned counsel for petitioner and respondent are present and jointly submit that during pendency of this revision petition, parties have settled dispute. A joint memo is filed to that effect, which reads as under:

¶25

''JOINT MEMO

¶26

The Petitioner/Accused and the Respondent/Complainant above named respectfully submit this Joint Memo as follows:

¶27

1. That the parties have amicably settled the dispute which is the subject matter of the present Criminal Revision Petition arising out of:

¶28

(a) the judgment of conviction and order dated 07.09.2018 passed in Crl. Appeal No. 795/2016 by the LXIV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, and

¶29

(b) the judgment and order of sentence dated 16.06.2016 passed in C.C. No. 26576/2014 by the XXII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.

¶30

2. That pursuant to the said settlement, the Complainant has agreed to receive a sum of Rs.3,15,000/-(Rupees Three Lakh Fifteen Thousand only) as full and final

¶31

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:44061 CRL.RP No. 1098 of 2018

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

settlement amount, which includes from the 50% of the cheque amount deposited before the trial court i.e. Rs.1,75,000/-(Rupees One Lakh Seventy-Five Thousand only). Which amount is already claimed and withdrawn by the Respondent/Complainant:

¶35

3. That in full and final settlement of all the claims and disputes between the parties, the Petitioner/Accused has today paid the balance sum of Rs.1,40,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Forty Thousand only) to the Respondent and the same is transferred to the bank account of the Respondent.

¶36

4. That the Complainant has agreed and received the above said amount i.e., Rs. 1,40,000/- as full and final settlement amount and states that he will not have any further grievance, claim, or demand of whatsoever nature against the Petitioner/Accused.

¶37

5. That in view of the above settlement, the parties jointly pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to record the compromise and dispose of the above Criminal Revision Petition in terms of this Joint Memo, in the interest of justice and equity.''

¶38

In terms of joint memo, complainant has agreed to

¶39

receive a sum of Rs.3,15,000/- in full and final settlement of his claim under cheque in question. It is stated that sum of Rs.1,75,000/- is deposited by accused before trial Court, which has been withdrawn by respondent/complainant. Balance amount of Rs.1,40,000/- is transferred to bank account of complainant today.

¶40

Joint memo is duly signed by both parties. Both parties are present and identified by their respective counsel. On interaction, they have stated that settlement is arrived at

¶41

¶42

NC: 2025:KHC:44061 CRL.RP No. 1098 of 2018

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

out of their free will and volition without any threat, coercion or

¶45

inducement from anybody.

¶46

I have perused terms of settlement and same are found to be lawful. Joint memo is taken on record and accepted.

¶47

In view of settlement, Revision Petition is allowed in terms of joint memo. Order of conviction and sentence dated 16.06.2016 passed by XXII ACMM, Bangalore City in C.C.no.26576/2014 and confirmed in judgment dated 07.09.2018 passed by VII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore City (CCH-65), in Crl.A.no.795/2016 are set aside and petitioner is acquitted for offences punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

¶48

Sd/(RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE

¶49

¶50

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40

Arjun Chandra v. Praveen Kumar K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Chandra v. Praveen Kumar K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lokesh. S. R. Vs Smt. Sandhya v Pai

Dr Syed Ahmed Kafeel Vs Zamani Kafeel

Shri Ravi Alias Sandwash Ravi Vs Smt Mohanalakshmi

M/S Jaya Engineering Works Vs Sri Nagaraj @ Nagarajan

Sri Vijayalakshmi Vs State of Karnataka by

Mohammed Roshan Khan Vs B M Venkatareddy