Sri Bhuvanesh vs Inayath Ulla Khan
2021 Latest Caselaw 6129 Kant

                             1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

                         BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

  CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.225 OF 2019


BETWEEN

Sri Bhuvanesh,
S/o Veerabraiah,
Aged about 48 years,
Proprietor of A.V. Developers,
No.98/1, 2nd Floor,
Sarjapura Main Road,
Koramangala, 1st Block,
Jakkasandra, Bengaluru-560034.
                                         ...Petitioner
(By Sri Srinivas N., Advocate)


AND

Inayath Ulla Khan,
S/o Late Ahmed Ulla Khan,
Aged about 65 years,
Residing at Khan Cottage,
No.289/A, 60 feet Road,
Talakaveri Layout,
Amruthahalli, Byatarayanapura,
Bengaluru-560092.
                                       ...Respondent
(By Sri Syed Suhail Ali, Advocate)
                                2


     This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section
397 read with 401 Cr.P.C praying to set aside the order
dated 13.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Court of the LXIII
Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru
(CCH-64), in Criminal Appeal No.906/2017, who was
pleased to dismiss the said appeal by confirming the order
dated 02.06.2017, passed by the Hon'ble court of the XII
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bengaluru in
C.C.No.33484/2014.


      This   Criminal     Revision   Petition   coming   on   for
admission this day, the court made the following:


                            ORDER

The petitioner having suffered judgment of

conviction in relation to offence under section 138 of

the Negotiable Instruments Act in C.C.33484/2014 on

the file of XII ACMM, Bengaluru, preferred an appeal,

i.e., Criminal Appeal 906/2017 to the Court of

Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-64),

Bengaluru. By judgment dated 13.12.2018 the

appellate court confirmed the judgment of conviction

and hence the petitioner has preferred this revision

petition.

2. Today Sri N.Srinivas, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri Syed Suhail Ali, learned counsel for

the respondent are present before the court. A joint

memo has been filed by the parties who are present

before the court. According to the joint memo, the

petitioner and the respondent have settled the matter.

The respondent is receiving total amount of

Rs.20,00,000/- in five installments commencing from

30.1.2022. The respondent confirms the same.

3. Therefore, the joint memo is placed on

record. Respondent is permitted to compound the

offence. Consequently, the judgment of conviction

against the petitioner passed by the trial court and the

judgment of the Sessions Court confirming the

judgment of Magistrate are set aside. The petitioner

is acquitted of the offence under section 138 of the

Negotiable Instruments Act.

4. It is submitted that when the petitioner

preferred this revision petition, he deposited an

amount of Rs.5,00,500/- vide three demand drafts in

the trial court. Respondent has no objection for

withdrawing this deposited money by the petitioner.

Therefore the trial court is hereby directed to release

the entire deposited amount in favour of the

petitioner.

Sd/-

JUDGE

ckl