Disposed

Sri Nizar Ahmed v. Mr Gokuldas Bhandarkar

Karnataka HC21 Jul 2026WP/12658/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of three concurrent writ petitions challenging the condition imposed by the Appellate Court directing the petitioner to deposit 20% of the fine for sentence suspension under Section 148 of the NI Act. The Court allowed payment in two installments.

What did the court decide?

Permit the petitioner to deposit the fine amount in two installments of 10% each within 3 weeks from today and the next 3 weeks.

Sri Nizar Ahmed Vs Mr Gokuldas Bhandarkar — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:37740 WP No. 12648 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12655 of 2026 WP No. 12658 of 2026

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

CNR: KAHC010275952026

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶6

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶7

BEFORE

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 12648 OF 2026 (GM-RES)

¶9

C/W

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO. 12655 OF 2026 (GM-RES) WRIT PETITION NO. 12658 OF 2026 (GM-RES)

¶11

IN WP No. 12648/2026

¶12

BETWEEN:

¶13

SRI. NIZAR AHMED, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O ABBAS ABBU, FLAT NO.105/205, NORTHERN SKY CITY TOWER B, NH 66, UJJODI, PUMPWELL, MANGALORE - 575 002.

¶14

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

(BY SRI. S.RAJASHEKAR., ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

MR. GANESH PRASAD BHANDARKAR, S/O. GOKULDAS BHANDARKAR, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT "SRI. GANESH PRASAD", KASHIBETTU, UJIRE VILLAGE AND POST, BELTHANGADY TALUK, D.K.

¶18

…PETITIONER

¶19

REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER (AS PER COMPLAINT), GOKULDAS BHANDARKAR, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

¶20

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

NC: 2026:KHC:37740 WP No. 12648 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12655 of 2026 WP No. 12658 of 2026

¶23

CNR: KAHC010275952026

¶24

S/O.B.PANDURANGA BHANDARKAR, R/AT SRI GANESH PRASAD, KASHIBETTU, UJIRE VILLAGE AND POST, BELTHANGADY TALUK - 574 214.

¶25

…RESPONDENT

¶26

(BY SRI. P.P.HEGDE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI.PRUTHVIRAJ S., ADVOCATE)

¶27

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 528 OF BNS PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02-022026 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K. MANGALURU ON I.A. NO.1 IN CRL.A. NO.49/2026 VIDE ANNEXURE - D, INSOFAR AS IT IMPOSES THE CONDITION DIRECTING THE PETITIONER-ACCUSED TO DEPOSIT 20 PERCENT OF THE FINE AMOUNT OF RS. 5,28,96,000/- (RUPEES FIVE CRORES TWENTY EIGHT LAKHS NINETY SIX THOUSAND ONLY) FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE DATED 05-01-2026 PASSED IN C.C NO.265/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE - B AND ETC.,

¶28

IN WP NO. 12655/2026

¶29

BETWEEN:

¶30

SRI. NIZAR AHMED, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O ABBAS ABBU, FLAT NO.105/205, NORTHERN SKY CITY TOWER B, NH 66, UJJODI, PUMPWELL, MANGALORE - 575 002. (BY SRI. S.RAJASHEKAR., ADVOCATE)

¶31

…PETITIONER

¶32

NC: 2026:KHC:37740 WP No. 12648 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12655 of 2026 WP No. 12658 of 2026

¶33

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

CNR: KAHC010275952026

¶36

AND:

¶37

M/S. BHANDARKAR CONSTRUCTIONS, UJIRE VILLAGE AND POST, BELTHANGADY TALUK, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER, MR. GOKULDAS BHANDARKAR, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, S/O.PANDURANGA BHANDARKAR, R/AT SRI. GANESH PRASAD, KASHIBETTU, UJIRE POST, BELTHANGADY TALUK - 574 214.

¶38

...RESPONDENT

¶39

(BY SRI. P.P.HEGDE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI.PRUTHVIRAJ S., ADVOCATE)

¶40

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 528 OF BNS PRAYING TO A. ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY APPROPRIATE OTHER WRIT/ORDERS, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02-02-2026 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDI. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K. MANGALURU ON I.A. NO.1 IN CRI.A. NO.50/2026 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, INSOFAR AS IT IMPOSES THE CONDITION DIRECTING THE PETITIONER-ACCUSED TO DEPOSIT 20PERCENT OF THE FINE AMOUNT OF RS. 2,65,18,000/(RUPEES TWO CRORES SIXTY FIVE LAKHS EIGHTEEN THOUSAND ONLY) FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE DATED 0501-2026 PASSED IN C.C NO.264/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.,

¶41

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC:37740 WP No. 12648 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12655 of 2026 WP No. 12658 of 2026

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

CNR: KAHC010275952026

¶45

IN WP NO. 12658/2026:

¶46

BETWEEN:

¶47

SRI. NIZAR AHMED, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O ABBAS ABBU, FLAT NO.105/205, NORTHERN SKY CITY TOWER B, NH 66, UJJODI, PUMPWELL,MANGALORE - 575 002. (BY SRI. S.RAJASHEKAR., ADVOCATE) AND: MR. GOKULDAS BHANDARKAR, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, S/O.PANDURANGA BHANDARKAR, R/AT SRI GANESH PRASAD, KASHIBETTU, UJIRE VILLAGE AND POST BELTHANGADY TALUK, D.K - 574214

¶48

…PETITIONER

¶49

...RESPONDENT

¶50

(BY SRI. P.P.HEGDE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI.PRUTHVIRAJ S., ADVOCATE)

¶51

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 528 OF BNS PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY APPROPRIATE OTHER WRIT/ORDERS, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02-02-2026 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K. MANGALURU ON 1.A. NO.1 IN CRI.A. NO.48/2026 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, INSOFAR AS IT IMPOSES THE CONDITION DIRECTING THE PETITIONER-ACCUSED TO DEPOSIT 20PERCENT OF THE FINE AMOUNT OF RS. 5,95,37,000/-

¶52

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

NC: 2026:KHC:37740 WP No. 12648 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12655 of 2026 WP No. 12658 of 2026

¶55

CNR: KAHC010275952026

¶56

(RUPEES FIVE CRORES NINETY FIVE LAKHS THIRTY SEVEN THOUSAND ONLY) FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE DATED 0501-2026 PASSED IN C.C NO. 266/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.,

¶57

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

¶58

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶59

ORAL ORDER

¶60

The parties to the lis in these three cases are one and the same. The issue is one and the same. The instruments are different, three cheques. The petitioner gets convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act for short). In all, for an amount of Rs.13 crores.

¶61

The petitioner files an appeal before the appellate Court. The appellate Court suspends the sentence subject to the condition that the petitioner should deposit 20% of the amount as obtaining under

¶62

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

NC: 2026:KHC:37740 WP No. 12648 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12655 of 2026 WP No. 12658 of 2026

¶65

CNR: KAHC010275952026

¶66

Section 148 of the NI Act. Challenging the said order, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶67

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits

¶68

that there is no reason rendered in the order for the order to be sustained, as it runs foul of the judgment of the Apex Court. The learned counsel would further submit that in the alternative, if reasonable time is granted, a deposit could be made before the concerned Court.

¶69

Learned Senior Counsel P. P. Hegde would submit that the petitioner's mandate of the statute cannot be stifled by the request of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in directing amount to be paid in a staggered manner. Be that as it may.

¶70

In the peculiar circumstances, I deem it

¶71

appropriate to permit the petitioner to deposit the said amount in two installments, 10% in 3 weeks from today

¶72

¶73

HC-KAR

¶74

NC: 2026:KHC:37740 WP No. 12648 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12655 of 2026 WP No. 12658 of 2026

¶75

CNR: KAHC010275952026

¶76

and another 10% in the next 3 weeks from the expiry of

¶77

said 3 weeks.

¶78

In the event, the petitioner would not comply with

¶79

the said deposit, it is open to the concerned Court to pass necessary orders unleashing the coercive arm of law.

¶80

Ordered accordingly and petitions stand disposed

¶81

of .

¶82

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA)

¶83

JUDGE

¶84

BSV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13

Sri Nizar Ahmed v. Mr Gokuldas Bhandarkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Nizar Ahmed v. Mr Gokuldas Bhandarkar

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

Krishnayadav @ Kallappagari Krishnappa Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Lokesh M Vs Smt. Deepika B

Sendil Kumar a Vs the State of Karnataka

Mrs Sudha Praveen Hubli Vs Mr. Praveen R Hubli

Sri. Somanna Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. R Madhava Reddy Vs State by Ramamurthy Nagar