Sri Suryaprakash Singapur vs The State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 3091 Kant

                         1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2021

                      BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

      WRIT PETITION NO.10111/2021 (GM-RES)


BETWEEN:-

SRI SURYAPRAKASH SINGAPUR
S/O. SRI SANNAYYA SINGAPUR,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/AT NO.166, ADARSH PALM MEADOWS,
WHITEFIELD ROAD,
RAMAGONDANAHALLI,
BENGALURU-560 066
                                  ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI UDAYA PRAKASH MULIYA, ADVOCATE(V.C.))

AND

1.    THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
      REPRESENTED BY ITS
      SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
      HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
      PIN - 560 001

2.    SRI R.J. RATNAKAR,
      S/O. SRI LATE R.V. JANAKIRAM,
      AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
                            2

     R/AT NO.2-501,
     SIVALAYAM STREET,
     PUTTAPARTHI-545 134
     ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT,
     ANDHRA PRADESH STATE
                                       ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP FOR R1(P.H.);
SRI H. RAMACHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 (P.H.))

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ
WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH
THE ORDER DTD.01.03.2021, PASSED BY THE XXXIV
ACMM,    MAYO    HALL,   BANGALORE     IN   C.C.
NO.52221/2019 REJECTING THE APPLICATION FILED
UNDER SECTION 143 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS
ACT VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

    THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:


                        ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner-complainant

under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India,

challenging the order passed by the XXXIV Additional

ACMM, Mayo Hall, Bangalore, on the application filed by

the complainant under Section 143(A) of Negotiable

Instruments Act (for short 'N.I. Act') in C.C.

No.52221/2019 on 01.03.2021.

2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the

petitioner and the learned counsel for respondent/accused.

3. The case of the complainant is that he filed a private

complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., against the

respondent/accused for the offence under Section 139 of

N.T. Act for dishonor of the Cheque issued by the

respondent/accused in favour of the petitioner-

complainant, for insufficient funds. After filing complaint,

the respondent/accused had appeared before the trial

Court. The complainant filed an application 143(A) of N.I.

Act for grant of 20% of the Cheque amount as interim

compensation. The same came to be allowed on

11.12.2019 in part. While allowing the application, the

respondent/accused was directed to pay 10% of the

Cheque amount as interim compensation within 60 days

from the date of said order. Subsequently, the

respondent/accused filed an application on 29.01.2020 for

permitting him to deposit 20% of the Cheque amount in

the Court and the same shall be kept in Court till disposal

of the case. But the trial Court instead of passing orders

on the application filed by respondent/accused, again

passed one more order on 01.03.2021 rejecting the

application filed by the complainant under Section 143(A)

of N.I. Act. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

4. Having heard the arguments and perused the

records, it is pertinent to note that initially an order has

been passed by the trial Court on 11.12.2019 by allowing

the application filed by the petitioner/complainant directing

the respondent/accused to pay 10% of the Cheque amount

as interim compensation as per Section 143(A) of N.I. Act.

Thereafter on 29.01.2020 the respondent/accused filed an

application under Section 143(A) of N.I. Act seeking

permission to deposit interim compensation amount in the

Court and to keep the said amount in the Court account till

disposal of the case. But the trial Court committed an

error without passing any order directing the

respondent/accused to deposit the amount in the Court or

rejecting the application. But proceeded to pass one more

order on 01.03.2021 by rejecting the application filed by

the very complainant under Section 143(A) of N.I. Act. It

may be by oversight or an error, but once the order was

passed by allowing or rejecting the application, the same

Magistrate has no power to recall any order passed on the

same application as per the provisions of Section 362 of

Cr.P.C. Therefore, I am of the view that the 2nd order

passed by the trial Court on 01.03.2021 is to be quashed

and accordingly it is quashed.

5. However, though the learned counsel for the

respondent/accused had already filed an application for

depositing the interim compensation in the Court till

disposal of the case, the trial Court has not passed any

order on that application. Even if it is considered, the trial

Court cannot change the order as there is a bar under

Section 362 of Cr.P.C. Therefore with the consent of

learned counsel for both the parties, the said application is

to be considered before this Court.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent/accused submits

that the petitioner/complainant is said to be a Foreign

Citizen and if the amount is released he may fled away

from India, then it is difficult to recover the said amount.

He also submits that the transaction is 10 years old and

there is every possibility of success of the

respondent/accused in the final judgment, therefore, by

looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is

necessary for this Court to pass an order on the application

filed by the respondent/accused seeking for permission to

deposit the amount before the Court.

7. There is substance in the arguments made by the

learned counsel for the respondent/accused.

8. Therefore, I am of the view that the application filed

by the respondent/accused is required to be disposed of by

exercising power under Articles 226 and 227 of the

Constitution of India apart from Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The petition is allowed.

The order passed by the trial Court on

01.03.2021 dismissing the application under

Section 143(A) of N.I. Act is hereby set aside. The

earlier order dated 11.12.2019 allowing the

application filed under Section 143(A) of N.I. Act is

restored. However the order is modified to direct

the respondent/accused to deposit 10% of the

Cheque amount in the Court within six weeks from

the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the

same shall be ordered to be deposited in any

Nationalized Bank as Fixed Deposit, initially for a

period of one year, which shall be renewable from

time to time, till disposal of the case by the trial

Court.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sbs*