Sunil Poojary vs Shama Shetty
2023 Latest Caselaw 680 Kant

                            1



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

                          BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

                   CRL. R.P.NO.1079/2021


BETWEEN:

SUNIL POOJARY
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
S/O DAMODHAR POOJARY
R/AT NANDA NILAYA
BABBU SWAMY TEMPLE ROAD
NEAR CHURCH, MALPE POST
KODAVOOR VILLAGE
UDUPI TLAUK
UDUPI DISTRICT-575 013.                     ... PETITIONER

       (BY SRI DILRAJ JUDE ROHIT SEQUEIRA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SHAMA SHETTY
S/O LATE BHUJANGA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT SHRIMATHA HOUSE
ASHIRVAD
KELARKALABETTU ROAD
UDUPI TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT-576 111.                    ... RESPONDENT

              (BY SRI S.K.ACHARYA, ADVOCATE)
                                  2



      THIS CRL.R.P., IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF
CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND
SENTENCE DATED 02.01.2018 PASSED IN C.C.NO.1171/2014
ON THE FILE OF 3RD ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC.,
UDUPI FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.138 OF NI ACT AND TO SET
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION DATED
13.09.2021 PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.13/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT UDUPI
U/S.374(3) AND 382 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
1973.

     THIS CRL.R.P., COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                              ORDER

This matter is listed for admission.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner is absent.

Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent.

3. This petition is filed under Section 397 read with

Section 401 of Cr.P.C., challenging the judgment of conviction

and sentence passed by the Trial Court, thereafter, an appeal

was filed, the same was also dismissed. Hence, the present

revision petition is filed.

4. This Court earlier while granting stay directed the

petitioner to deposit 50% of the fine amount. Accordingly, an

amount of Rs.5,72,500/- has been deposited on 23.12.2021

before the Trial Court. Both learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the

respondent made the submission before this Court on

20.10.2022 that the matter has been settled for an amount of

Rs.4,00,000/- in favour of the complainant. This Court directed

to pay the said amount to the complainant and directed to

refund the excess amount to the petitioner/accused.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent -

complainant submits that the complainant has received an

amount of Rs.4 Lakhs out of the deposited amount of

Rs.5,72,500/- as directed by this Court. This Court also directed

to refund the remaining amount in favour of the petitioner on

proper identification.

6. There is no information with regard to whether the

petitioner had taken the amount or not and the learned counsel

for the petitioner is also not present before the Court. On the

earlier occasion also, the learned counsel for the petitioner was

absent and already there was a direction to refund the amount in

favour of the petitioner.

7. Having taken note of the fact that the matter has

been settled between the parties for a sum of Rs.4 Lakhs and

the same has been acknowledged by the complainant. Hence,

nothing remains to decide the issue between the parties.

Consequently, in view of the settlement, the petitioner has been

acquitted for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI

Act.

8. Accordingly, the Revision Petition stands disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

cp*