Sri Rajashekar vs Sri Dinesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3020 Kant

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

   DATED THIS THE 22 N D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                        BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

 CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.323 OF 2019

BETWEEN:

Sri Rajashekar
S/o Late Venkataiah
Aged about 43 years
R/o Guddenahalli
Janatha Colony
J.H.Kere Post
Kasaba Hobli
Hassan Taluk-573103
                                           ...Petitioner
(By Sri Jag adeesh H T, Advocate)

AND:

Sri Dinesh
S/o Bheemegowda
Aged about 45 years
R/o Rayasamud ra villag e
Kunduru Hobli
Aluru Taluk-573213
                                         ...Respondent
(By Sri H.N.Sharath Kumar, Ad vocate)

      This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under
Section 397 read with 401 of Cr.P.C., praying to set
aside the impugned judgment and ord er dated
17.01.2019 p assed by the Learned V Additional
District   and     Sessions   Judge,    Hassan      in
Crl.A.No.275/2018 and confirming the judgment and
order dated 16.10.2018 passed b y the Civil Judg e and
                           :: 2 ::


JMFC at Alur in C.C.No.343/2016                and   allow   this
petition with costs throughout.

    This Criminal Revision Petition coming on for
admission this d ay, the Court made the following:


                         ORDER

The petitioner and the respondent are present

before the Court with their respective Advocates.

2. Today, a joint memo under Section 147

of the Negotiable Instruments Act (N.I.Act) signed

by the petitioner and the respondent and their

respective Advocates is filed for compounding the

offence.

3. The petitioner being the accused suffered

a judgment of conviction in relation to offence

under Section 138 of N.I.Act and was sentenced to

pay fine of Rs.1,95,000/- with default sentence of

one year simple imprisonment. The petitioner

then preferred an appeal to the Sessions Court and

challenged the judgment of conviction. By

judgment dated 17.01.2019, the V Additional :: 3 ::

District and Sessions Judge, Hassan, dismissed the

appeal and therefore the petitioner has preferred

this revision petition.

4. By virtue of the joint memo filed, the

petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.1,65,000/- to the

respondent by way of cash. The respondent

acknowledges receipt of cash of Rs.1,65,000/- and

submits that he is ready for composition of the

offence and to withdraw the complaint. Therefore

joint memo is placed on record. Compounding is

recorded.

5. The judgments of the trial Court as also

the appellate Court are set-aside. The petitioner

is acquitted of the offence punishable under

Section 138 of N.I.Act.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Kmv/-