Karnataka High Court
Sri H Manjunath vs Smt H Vanalakshmi on 15 July, 2022
Bench: Dr.H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.248 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
Sri H. Manjunath
S/o Late Sri Honnappa
Aged about 55 years,
R/at MP/6, "Sapthagiri Nilaya",
4th Cross, 4th Main Road,
Western Extension,
Jayanagar -572102
Tumkur Town.
.. Petitioner
(By Sri. R.B.Sadasivappa, Advocate)
AND:
Smt H. Vanalakshmi
W/o Sri B.L. Krishnamurthy
Aged about 58 years,
R/at MIG, No.51
KHB Colony, Shira Gate,
Tumkur Town-572 106.
..Respondent
(By Sri. Narendra S., Advocate)
***
This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397
and Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,
praying to set aside the impugned order dated 17-02-2020
passed by the 5th Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumkur in
Crl.R.P.No.248/2022
2
C.C.No.4040/2015 and the order dated 24-09-2021 passed by
the Principal District and Sessions Judge at Tumkur in Crl.Appeal
No.37/2020 and consequently dismiss the complaint filed by the
complainant/respondent herein in C.C No.4040/2015 passed by
the 5th Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumkuru vide order dated
17-2-2020 and grant such other orders or directions as this
Court deems fit under the circumstances of the case, in the
interest of justice and equity.
The Criminal Revision Petition coming on for Admission
through physical hearing/video conferencing hearing, this day,
the Court made the following:
ORDER
The present revision petition has been filed by the
accused, challenging the judgment of conviction and order
on sentence passed by the 5th Additional Civil judge and
J.M.F.C., at Tumakuru (hereinafter for brevity referred to as
"the Trial Court") in C.C.No.4040/2015, holding the accused
guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter for brevity
referred to as the "N.I. Act"), which was further confirmed
by the Sessions Judge's Court in the appeal filed by him.
Challenging the impugned judgments of conviction
Crl.R.P.No.248/2022
and order on sentence passed by both the Courts, the
petitioner (accused) has filed the present revision petition.
2. Learned counsels from both side along with the
respondent (complainant in the Trial Court), as identified
by her learned counsel, are physically present in the Court.
3. Learned counsels from both side have filed a joint
application - I.A.No.1/2022, under Section 147 of the N.I.
Act, reporting that the parties have settled the matter, as
such, the petitioner (accused) who is said to be in Judicial
Custody in Criminal Case No.4040/2015, on the file of the
5th Additional Civil judge and J.MM.F.C., at Tumakuru, be
released.
4. Learned counsels for the parties also make their
submission on the lines of the joint application.
5. The enquiry made with the party who is physically
present convinces the Court that both the parties out of
their free consent and volition and in their best interest
have settled the matter amicably which is further
Crl.R.P.No.248/2022
corroborated by the submissions made by their learned
counsels. As such, I am of the view that on the terms of
the said joint application, the parties be permitted to
compound the offence under Section 147 of the N.I. Act,
however, subject to the payment of the graded cost by the
petitioner/accused.
6. Section 147 of the N.I. Act has made every
offence punishable under the N.I. Act as compoundable. As
such, there is no bar for the parties in the proceeding to
compound the offence. However, at the same time, the
guidelines laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S.
Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H reported in AIR 2010
SUPREME COURT 1907 regarding imposing graded cost on
litigant also to be borne in mind. According to the said
Judgment in Damodar S. Prabhu's Case (supra), if the
application for compounding is made before the Sessions
Court or High Court in revision or appeal, such
compounding is permitted to be allowed on the common
Crl.R.P.No.248/2022
condition that the accused pays 15% of the cheque amount
by way of graded cost.
7. Admittedly, in the instant case, the cheque amount
is for a sum of `10,00,000/-, as such, the graded cost
would be `1,50,000/-.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner (accused) has
filed a memo, along with a Demand Draft bearing
No.590430 dated 15-07-2022, for a sum of `1,50,000/-,
drawn in favour of the Member Secretary, DLSA, Tumkur,
on Karnataka Bank Limited, Bengaluru-City Civil Court.
9. Though the graded cost was required to be paid to
the State Legal Services Authority, however, considering
the nature of urgency involved in the matter, as the
petitioner (accused) is said to be languishing in jail, the
graded cost paid through Demand Draft to the Member
Secretary, DLSA, Tumkur, is accepted.
10. Accordingly, taking into consideration the joint
application filed by both side and the guidelines given by
Crl.R.P.No.248/2022
the Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S. Prabhu's case
(supra), I.A.No.1/2022 is allowed. The parties are
permitted to compound the offence under Section 147 of
the N.I. Act. The matter is settled between the parties as
per the terms mentioned in the joint application and the
petitioner herein who was accused in the Court of the 5th
Additional Civil judge and J.MM.F.C., at Tumakuru, in
C.C.No.4040/2015, is acquitted of the offence punishable
under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.
In view of acquittal of the petitioner herein from the
alleged offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I.
Act, the petitioner herein - Sri H. Manjunath, S/o.
Late Sri Honnappa, Aged about 55 years, R/at MP/6,
"Sapthagiri Nilaya", 4th Cross, 4th Main Road, Western
Extension, Jayanagar -572102, Tumkur Town, who is said
to be in Judicial Custody in C.C.No.4040/2015, be released
from the Judicial Custody forthwith, provided he is not
required to be continued in Judicial Custody in any other
case.
Crl.R.P.No.248/2022
Registry to transmit the operative portion of this order
to the concerned Jail authorities, forthwith by Fax/e-mail or
such other effective mode to enable them to proceed further
in the matter.
Accordingly, the present revision petition stands
disposed of.
Registry to do the needful in encashment and
appropriation of the Demand Draft towards the graded cost.
In view of disposal of the main matter, pending
I.A.No.1/2021 does not survive for consideration.
Registry to transmit a copy of this order to both the
Trial Court and also to the Sessions Judge's Court,
immediately.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BMV*
