Smt R Uma Shivaramaiah vs Smt S H Leelavathi
2023 Latest Caselaw 6124 Kant

                                            -1-
                                                        NC: 2023:KHC:31184
                                                    CRL.RP No. 306 of 2015




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                        DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

                                         BEFORE
                    THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
                     CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 306 OF 2015
                 BETWEEN:

                 SMT. R. UMA SHIVARAMAIAH,
                 D/O LATE R. SHIVARAMAIAH,
                 AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
                 RESIDING AT NO.44, 4TH CROSS,
                 F.C.I. LAYOUT,
                 DEEPANJALI NAGAR, MYSORE ROAD,
                 BANGALORE-560 026.

                                                            ...PETITIONER
                 (BY SRI. M.S.K. FAREEDA TABREZ ANSARI, ADVOCATE FOR
                    SRI. H.R. SANJEEVE GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

                 AND:

                 SMT. S.H. LEELAVATHI,
                 W/O H.H. SHIVAPPA,
                 AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
Digitally        RESIDING AT NO.729, 14TH CROSS,
signed by        2ND STAGE, GIRINAGAR,
RENUKAMBA        BANGALORE-560 085
KG                                                          ...RESPONDENT
Location: High   (BY SRI. M. N. MUNI REDDY, ADVOCATE)
Court of              THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.374(2) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO
Karnataka        SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.04.2014 PASSED IN
                 C.C.NO.3744/2008 PASSED BY THE XII A.C.M.M., BANGALORE
                 BY   DISMISSING     THE    COMPLAINT    FILED    BY   THE
                 COMPLAINANT/RESPONDENT AND SET ASIDE THE DISMISSAL
                 ORDER PASSED BY THE PRL. CITY CIVIL AND S.J., BANGALORE
                 IN CRL.A.NO.476/2014 DATED 21.10.2014.
                                  -2-
                                                NC: 2023:KHC:31184
                                            CRL.RP No. 306 of 2015




     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                               ORDER

This revision is filed by the revision petitioner challenging

the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed in

CC.No.3744/2008, on the file of XII ACMM, Bangalore and

dismissal of the appeal by preceding officer of Fast Track Court

No.6 in Crl.A.No.476/2014 dated 21.10.2014.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are

referred with the original ranks occupied by them before the

trial Court.

3. The accused was prosecuted for the offence

punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments

Act, 1881 (for short 'N.I. Act'), in C.C.No.3744/2008. After

hearing the matter on merits, the learned Magistrate has

convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section

138 of N.I. Act by exercising the power under Section 255(2) of

Cr.P.C. by imposing sentence of fine. This order is being

challenged in Crl.A.No.476/2014 by the accused before the

learned Sessions Judge.

NC: 2023:KHC:31184 CRL.RP No. 306 of 2015

4. The learned Sessions Judge has dismissed the

appeal on 21.10.2014 recording that there is no representation

on behalf of the appellant and counsel for the appellant and

copy of the petition was not furnished for issuing notice to the

other side. This order is being challenged in this case.

5. Having heard the arguments and perusing the

records, it is evident that the appellate Court has committed an

error in dismissing the appeal only on mechanical grounds. The

appellate Court being the first appellate Court on fact and

question of law should have given an opportunity to the

appellant in this regard or it should have issued warrant against

him, but without taking any other recourse straight away

dismissed the appeal which has resulted in miscarriage of

justice. The appeal ought to have been heard on merits and in

view of these facts and circumstances, revision petition needs

to be allowed and accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

1) The revision petition is allowed.

NC: 2023:KHC:31184 CRL.RP No. 306 of 2015

2) The impugned order passed by the Fast Tract Court IV in Crl.A.No.476/2014 dated 21.10.2014, is set aside.

3) The matter is restored and remanded back to the Sessions Judge with a direction to restore it in Original number. The revision petitioner is directed to comply the office objections and the learned Sessions Judge is directed to proceed to issue notice to the respondent/complainant and then, dispose of the matter on merits.

4) The accused/revision petitioner is directed to appear before the learned Sessions Judge on 11.10.2023 at 10.30 a.m., without waiting for notice from the Court.

Send back the original records to the concerned trial

Court along with a copy of this order.

Sd/-

JUDGE

DS