Sri Vasudev N vs Smt B Radhakumari
2022 Latest Caselaw 748 Kant

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

    DATED THIS THE 17 T H DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

                       BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

 CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.824 OF 2020

BETWEEN:

Sri Vasud ev N.,
Son of Late Nanjudappa,
Aged about 58 years,
R/at No.525, Tank Bund Road,
Dodd ab allapura Town,
Dodd ab allapura,
Beng aluru Rural District-561203.

Correct Residential Add ress:
Sri. Vasudev N.,
Son of Late Nanjund app a,
Aged about 58 years,
Residing at No.303, 4 t h Main,
Someshwara Extension,
Dodd ab allapura,
Beng aluru Rural District-561203.
                                         ...Petitioner
(By Sri Tomy Sebastian, Advocate for
    Smt. Melanie Sebastian, Advocate)

AND:

Smt. B.Radhakumari,
D/o D.Rangaswamy,
Major, Hindu,
Residing at:
Himag iri Meadows,
No.81, Bennerghatta Road,
Gotteg eri, Beng aluru-560083.
                                        ...Respondent
(By Sri Nithin R., Advocate)
                                    :: 2 ::



        This       Criminal    Revision      Petition        is    filed    under
Section 397 read with 401 of Cr.P.C., praying to set
aside        the     judgment    dated       21.11.2020                p assed    in
Criminal Appeal No.671/2019 by the LVIII Additional
City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-59), Beng aluru,
Confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence
passed         by        the    XXII      ACMM,          Beng aluru               in
C.C.No.3869/2016 and etc.

        This Criminal          Revision      Petition    coming            on    for
admission through video conferencing this d ay, the
Court mad e the following:

                                 ORDER

Sri Tomy Sebastian, learned Senior Counsel

for the petitioner submits that if another six

months time is granted to the petitioner, he will

deposit the balance of the fine amount. Counsel

for the respondent submits that he has no

objections for the same. But he seeks permission

to withdraw the amount already deposited by the

petitioner.

2. Sri Tomy Sebastian, learned Senior

Counsel for the petitioner says no objection for :: 3 ::

withdrawing the deposited money by the

respondent.

3. Judgment of the trial Court shows that

the petitioner has been sentenced to pay fine of

Rs.20,00,000/- in connection with the offence

punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act. Out of Rs.20,00,000/-,

Rs.19,98,000/- shall be paid to the respondent/

complainant towards compensation and Rs.2,000/-

shall be paid to the State Exchequer. Therefore

out of the deposited amount of Rs.10,00,000/-,

the respondent is permitted to withdraw

Rs.9,98,000/- and Rs.2,000/- shall be defrayed to

the State Exchequer towards prosecution

expenses. The petitioner is given six months time

from today for depositing the balance fine amount

of Rs.10,00,000/-.

4. Since the petitioner's counsel submits

that he does not press this petition in view of time :: 4 ::

being extended, this revision petition stands

disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Kmv/-