Karnataka High Court
Sri Raghavendra vs Mr Devindrappa S A on 19 September, 2022
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.59 OF 2021
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. RAGHAVENDRA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
S/O K.B.GOPAL
M/S. RAGHAVENDRA CHAMBER
BRICKS (RCB BRICKS)
FACTORY AT: THUBARAHALLI,
NEAR SOLUR, KUNIGAL ROAD,
MAGADI TALUK, RAMANAGAR DISTRICT.
AND RESIDING AT:
MANJUNATHA SWAMY NILAYA,
M/S. RAGHAVENDRA CHAMBER
BRICKS (RCB BRICKS)
R/O.NO: 123, 2ND MAIN,
TELEPHONE LAYOUT, KOTTIGEPALYA,
BENGALURU-560 091.
2. SRI. K.B.GOPAL
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
S/O LATE BYLAPPA
PROPRIETOR: M/S. RAGHAVENDRA
CHAMBER BRICKS (RCB BRICKS)
FACTORY AT: THUBARAHALLI,
NEAR SOLUR, KUNIGAL ROAD,
MAGADI TALUK, RAMANAGAR DISTRICT.
AND RESIDING AT
NO.517, SRI. MANJUNATHA NILAYA
1ST "D" CROSS, 3RD STAGE,
4TH DIVISION, BASAVESHWARANAGAR
BENGALURU-560 079.
2
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. ROOPESHA.B, ADVOCATE) (PH)
AND:
MR. DEVINDRAPPA.S.A
S/O LATE SHIVARAMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
PROPRIETOR: SRI RAMA ENTERPRISES,
DEALERS IN COAL, COKE & TRANSPORT
CONTRACTOR, NO:21,
CHIKKAGOLLARAHATTI,
MAGADI MAIN ROAD,
(NEAR SANDYA WEIGH BRIDGE)
VISHWANEEDAM POST,
BENGALURU-560 091.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. R.S.HEGDE, ADVOCATE) (PH)
***
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 397 R/W SECTION 401 OF Cr.P.C, PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02.01.2020 PASSED IN
CRL.A.NO.2041/2019 BY THE LVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU AND THE ORDER
DATED 05.09.2019 PASSED IN C.C.NO.23754/2017 BY THE
12TH A.C.M.M., AT BENGALURU AND ACQUIT THE
PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTION 138 OF THE N.I ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS COMING ON
FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE/PHYSICAL
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING;
3
ORDER
This revision petition is preferred by the accused
against the judgment and order of conviction and
sentence passed by the Trial Court for the offence
punishable under Section 138 of the N.I Act, which is
confirmed by the Appellate Court.
2. Cheque amount is ` 9,24,900/-. The Trial Court
has imposed a fine of ` 18,49,800/-, out of which a sum
of ` 18,47,800/- has been awarded as compensation to
the complainant/respondent. The balance amount of
` 2,000/- is adjusted towards the State as fine.
3. An application has been filed under Section 147
of the N.I Act,1881 reporting settlement. The said
application is signed by both the parties as well as the
learned counsel appearing for them. The parties are
present before the Court and acknowledges the
settlement taken place between them.
4. As per the settlement, the complainant has
agreed to receive ` 2,50,000/- in addition to the cheque
amount of `9,24,900/- which totally comes to
` 11,74,900/-.
5. It is submitted that a sum of ` 9,24,900/- is in
deposit before the 12th Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bengaluru and the petitioners counsel
submits that there is no objection if the said amount is
withdrawn by the respondent/complainant. It is also
stated that a demand draft bearing No.605576 dated
09.09.2022 drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank in the name
of respondent for a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- has been
handed over to him, which is also acknowledged by the
respondent who is present before the Court.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that the petitioner No.2 is the father of petitioner No.1,
who is now aged about 65 years and he is suffering from
age old ailments. He submits that the petitioners were
doing Brick manufacturing and now the factory is
shutdown and they are without any avocation. He
submits that petitioner No.1 has to look after his wife
and two children as well as his age old parents. He
further submits that the petitioner is a bonafide litigant
and at no point of time he had any intention to avoid
payment and in fact on his own volition he has come
forward to settle the matter and paid `2,50,000/- more
then the cheque amount.
7. The Hon'ble Apex Court in "DAMODAR S.
PRABHU VS SAYED BABALAL H." reported in (2010)
5 SCC 663 has held at para 25 is as under:
"The graded scheme for imposing costs is a
means to encourage compounding at an early
stage of litigation. In the status quo, valuable
time of the court is spent on the trial of these
cases and the parties are not liable to pay any
court fee since the proceedings are governed by
the Code of Criminal Procedure, even though the
impact of the offence is largely confined to the
private parties. Even though the imposition of
costs by the competent court is a matter of
discretion, the scale of costs has been suggested
in the interest of uniformity. The competent court
can of course reduce the costs with regard to the
specific facts and circumstances of a case, while
recording reasons in writing for such variance.
Bona fide litigants should of course contest the
proceedings to their logical end."
8. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the
case, keeping in view the submission of the learned
counsel for the petitioners, this Court is of the view that
a sum of ` 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) may
be imposed as cost on the petitioners, payable to the
State Legal Services Authority.
9. For the foregoing reasons the following order is
passed:-
a. I.A No.2/2022 filed under Section 147 of the N.I
Act is allowed and the parties are permitted to
compound the offence.
b. The judgment and order dated 05.09.2019 passed
by the Court of XII Addl. Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C No.23754/2017 and
dated 02.01.2021 passed by the Court of LVIII
Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City
in Criminal Appeal No.2041/2019 are hereby set
aside.
c. The petitioners/accused are acquitted of the offence
punishable under Section 138 of the N.I Act.
d. The Petitioners shall deposit a sum of `50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) towards cost, with
the State Legal Services Authority and shall file a
receipt for having paid the cost before the Registry
of this Court within a period of two weeks from
today.
e. The respondent/complainant is permitted to
withdraw a sum of ` 9,24,900/-(Rupees Nine Lakhs
Twenty Four Thousand Nine Hundred only) which is
in deposit before the Trial Court .
Revision Petition is allowed.
Pending I.A's if any, is disposed of.
Registry is directed to send back the records.
Sd/-
JUDGE
VS
