Sri Siddegowda Vs Sri Ravindra Agarwal

SRI RAVINDRA AGARWAL S/O LATE RAM BHAGATH AGARWAL AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS OWNER GAURAV STEEL CORPORATION, R/AT NO.1551 V.V.ROAD, K.R.MOHALLA MYSURU - 570 024.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI NANJUNDA SWAMY N, ADV.)

¶15

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 17.08.2023 IN CRL.A.NO.149/2022 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE MYSURU AND JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 01.04.2022 IN C.C.NO.162/2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED IV JMFC MYSURU BY ALLOWING THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION.

¶16

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

¶17

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:1672 CRL.RP No. 1342 of 2023

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

This Criminal Revision petition under Section 397 R/w Section 401 of Cr.P.C, is filed by the accused with a prayer to set aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Court of JMFC-IV, Mysuru in C.C.No.162 of 2017 dated 01.04.2022 which is confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.149 of 2022 by the Court of II Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Mysuru by judgment and order dated 17.08.2023.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent jointly submit that during the pendency of this revision petition the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the respondent /complainant has agreed to receive a total sum of Rs.7,05,000/- from the petitioner towards full and final settlement of the claim under the cheque in question. They submit that parties have filed a memo along with joint affidavit of the petitioner and respondent. They also submit that the petitioner and the General Power of Attorney of the respondent are present before this Court. The parties who are present

¶25

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:1672 CRL.RP No. 1342 of 2023

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

before the Court in person are identified by their learned Advocates.

¶28

Submission is made that settlement arrived

¶29

between the parties is voluntary without there being any undue influence and coercion.

¶30

Learned counsel for the respondent and the General Power of Attorney of the respondent namely Sri. Mohan Kumar, have submitted before the Court that a sum of Rs.2,30,000/paid in cash by the petitioner has been received by them. Submission is placed on record. The memo dated 07.01.2026 along with the joint affidavit of the petitioner and respondent and also the General Power of Attorney of the respondent is taken on record.

¶31

In paragraph nos.6 to 8 of the joint affidavit of the petitioner and respondent it is stated as follows:

¶32

"6. We the parties to the proceeding have resolve our dispute as stated in the aforesaid agreement that the Petitioner/Accused has agreed to pay and the Complainant has agreed to receive in all a sum of Rs.7,05,000/as against the fine amount of Rs.9,55,000/- imposed by the learned IV JMFC, Mysore in CC No.162/2017.

¶33

4 -

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:1672 CRL.RP No. 1342 of 2023

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

7. We submit that as the Petitioner/Accused has deposited a sum of Rs.4,75,000/- in CC No.162/2017 before the learned IV JMFC, Mysore, the Complainant has agreed to withdraw the same for which the Accused has no objection. It is also agreed that the balance of Rs.2,30,000/- out of Rs.7,05,000/- agreed to be paid by the Accused has already been paid in two instalments, i.e., a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- on 19.11.2025 while executing the aforesaid Agreement and further sum of Rs.80,000/- on 05.12.2025 which payments have been received by the Complainant.

¶37

8. We submit that in terms of the aforesaid settlement arrived at, the Respondent/Complainant has no objection to dispose of the above Criminal Revision Petition by setting aside the order of conviction, convicting the Petition/Accused for the offence punishable under Sec.138 of N I Act, 1881 by sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs.9,55,000/- and also the order of the learned Sessions Judge confirming the aforesaid sentence, and acquit the Petitioner/Accused."

¶38

In view of the settlement arrived between the parties this revision petition is required to be disposed of in terms of the joint memo filed by the parties and consequently the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Courts below needs to be set aside.

¶39

Accordingly the following

¶40

5 -

¶41

NC: 2026:KHC:1672 CRL.RP No. 1342 of 2023

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

ORDER

¶44

(i) The Criminal Revision Petition is allowed.

¶45

(ii) The impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Court of JMFC-IV, Mysuru in C.C.No.162 of 2017 dated 01.04.2022 which is confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.149 of 2022 by the Court of II Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Mysuru by judgment and order dated 17.08.2023 are set aside and the petitioner is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

¶46

(iii) The respondent / complainant is permitted to withdraw the amount of Rs.4,75,000/said to have been deposited by the petitioner before the Trial Court in C.C.No.162 of 2017.

¶47

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶48

NMS/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28

Sri Siddegowda v. Sri Ravindra Agarwal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Siddegowda v. Sri Ravindra Agarwal

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

Pavan Vs State by

Shri Satya Narayan Tulysan Vs M/S Krishna Enterprises

M/S Sarvana Alloy Steels P Ltd. Vs M/S Xindia Steels Limited

State of Karnataka Vs Sri Govindaraju

State by Sarguru Police Station Vs Devendra Kumar Soni

T B Venkataswamy Vs H M Chandrashekharaiah