Karnataka High Court
Sri S M Ravi Kumar vs Sri Devarayalu on 16 August, 2022
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.768 OF 2022
BETWEEN
SRI. S.M.RAVI KUMAR,
S/O. RAJANNA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/O. NEAR R.M.NURSING HOME,
J.M.ROAD, KRISHNEGOWDA BUILDING,
MUDIGERE AT AND POST-577 132.
CHIKKAMANGALURU DISTRICT.
... PETITIONER
[BY SRI. PRASANNA B.R., ADVOCATE]
AND
SRI. DEVARAYALU,
S/O. THANGARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/O. THATKOLE ROAD,
NEAR KSRTC BUS STAND,
MUDIGERE AT AND POST-577 132.
CHIKKAMANGALURU DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENT
[BY SRI. RAVIKUMAR N.R., ADVOCATE]
***
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT PASSED IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.16/2022 DATED
06.04.2022 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY
COURT AT CHIKKAMAGALURU CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT IN CC
2
NO. 293/2019 DATED 20.03.2021, ON FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND JMFC MUDIGERE AND ACQUIT THE ACCUSED.
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE/PHYSICAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This revision petition is filed against the judgment
and order dated 20.03.2021 passed by the Court of the
Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Mudigere in
C.C.No.293/2019 and the judgment and order dated
06.04.2022 passed by the Court of Principal Judge,
Family Court at Chikkamagaluru in Criminal Appeal
No.16/2022.
2. Vide impugned judgment, the trial Court
convicted the accused for the offence punishable under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and
sentenced him to undergo S.I for one year and to pay
fine of `10,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine to
undergo S.I for a period of two months.
3. Out of the fine amount a sum of `9,90,000/-
was ordered to be given to the complainant under
Section 357(1) of Cr.P.C., and `10,000/- was ordered to
be confiscated to the State.
4. In the appeal preferred by the accused, the
learned Sessions judge was pleased to set aside the
sentence imposed on him to undergo S.I for a term of
one year but imposition of fine of `10,00,000/- and
default sentence was confirmed.
5. Learned counsel appearing on both sides
submit that the parties have settled the dispute out of
Court and in terms of the settlement arrived, the
complainant/respondent has agreed to receive a total
sum of `7,50,000/-from the accused/petitioner. It is
further submitted that a sum of `2,00,000/- is in deposit
before the trial Court and the balance amount of
`5,50,000/- has to be paid by the accused to the
complainant. It is submitted that a sum of `2,50,000/- is
already paid by the accused and the accused has agreed
to pay the balance amount of `3,00,000/-.
6. Both the parties are present before the Court.
The respondent/complainant has acknowledged the
terms of settlement.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that in view of the above settlement, he may be
permitted to withdraw this revision petition. He has filed
a memo, which shall be placed on record. Accordingly
the following
ORDER
The revision petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
The respondent/complainant is permitted to
withdraw the amount which is in deposit before the trial
Court after deducting `10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand
only), which shall be confiscated to the State.
The compliance of the order in the above terms for
payment of balance amount to the complainant shall be
reported before the trial Court within a period of six
weeks from today failing which the complainant is at
liberty to proceed against the accused to execute the
order, in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HB/-
