Sri Ashwath Narayana Reddy @ A N ... vs M/S Confident Project India Pvt ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 6650 Kant

                                               -1-
                                                              NC: 2023:KHC:34008
                                                         CRL.RP No. 1328 of 2022




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                     DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

                                            BEFORE
                  THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

                CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1328 OF 2022 (397)


                BETWEEN:

                Sri. Ashwath Narayana Reddy @ A N Reddy
                S/o Muniyappa Reddy
                Aged About 61 Years,
                R/at H.No.80, Poojamma Compound,
                Halanayakana Halli,
                Varthur Hobli,
                Malar Taluk,
                Bengaluru-560102.
                                                                      ...Petitioner
                (By Sri.M.G. Riyazulla Khan along with
                Smt. D. Kavitha, Advocates)
Digitally       AND:
signed by
VEENA
KUMARI B
Location:
High Court of
                M/s Confident Project India Pvt Ltd
Karnataka
                R/at Confident Propous,
                No.6, Longford Town,
                Hosur Main Road,
                Bengaluru-560025.
                Rep by its Manager, Mr. Joju Kochappan
                                                                    ...Respondent
                (By Sri. Vivek Holla, Holla and Holla)

                                              ****
                                   -2-
                                                     NC: 2023:KHC:34008
                                            CRL.RP No. 1328 of 2022




      This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397
read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,
praying to   set aside the judgment and orders passed by the
LVI Additional     City Civil and       Sessions Judge, Bengaluru
(CCH-57) in Crl. Appeal No.776/2021 dated 26-07-2022 and
set aside the judgment and orders passed by the learned XXIV
Additional   Small   Causes    Judge     and    A.C.M.M.     (SCCH-26)
Bengaluru in C.C.No.514/2018 dated 09-09-2021, acquit the
petitioner by allowing this criminal revision petition, in the
interest of justice and equity.

      This Criminal Revision Petition coming on for Further
Hearing, through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing
this day, the Court made the following:

                           ORDER

Learned counsel - Sri. M.G. Riyazulla Khan is physically

present and files a 'no objection' vakalath appearing along

the present counsel on record Smt. D. Kavitha for the

revision petitioner. The said vakalath is taken on record,

however, subject to the scrutiny to be made by the

registry.

2. The learned counsel for the respondent

(complainant) is also physically present.

NC: 2023:KHC:34008 CRL.RP No. 1328 of 2022

3. The revision petitioner, as identified by the

learned counsel for the revision petitioner is also physically

present.

4. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner

Sri.M.G. Riyazulla Khan submits that, since the learned

counsel - Smt. D. Kavitha is not keeping good health, she

has not appeared today.

5. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner files a

memo, seeking withdrawal of this revision petition.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent endorses the

said memo stating his 'no objection' to withdraw the

present revision petition.

7. Heard the submissions from both side on the

memo.

8. The present revision petition was filed by the

revision petitioner (accused) challenging the confirmation

of his conviction by the Court of the LVI Additional City

NC: 2023:KHC:34008 CRL.RP No. 1328 of 2022

Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-57), for the

offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter for brevity referred to

as "the N.I. Act").

9. At one point of time, since the learned counsel

for the revision petitioner continuously remained absent

from appearing in this matter, the Court proceeded to

appoint an Amicus Curiae for the revision petitioner to

prevent any further delay in the disposal of the matter.

However, by the order dated 01-09-2023, the learned

Amicus Curiae came to be relieved at the request of the

learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned

counsel for the revision petitioner was permitted to

continue to appear for the petitioner. Still, at the request

of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, the

matter got further adjourned on the said date as well on

the dates 08-09-2023 and 15-09-2023.

NC: 2023:KHC:34008 CRL.RP No. 1328 of 2022

10. A perusal of the order sheet would go to show

that, after hearing the argument from both side, when the

matter was slated for the reply argument, it was

submitted that a settlement attempt was made between

the parties. It is thereafter and at that stage, the matter

got adjourned repeatedly to report settlement or to

proceed further in the matter. It was also noticed by this

Court in one such date of hearing that, in case if the

parties settle the matter under Section 147 of the N.I. Act,

the revision petitioner (accused) may have to pay the

graded cost of a sum of `75,00,000/- which is `15% of the

cheque amount, which cheque amount is a sum of

`5,00,00,000/-. The said graded cost was required to be

payable by the revision petitioner by virtue of the

judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H reported in AIR

2010 SUPREME COURT 1907. After the said observation

was made on the date 23-11-2022, the matter was

adjourned on several occasions.

NC: 2023:KHC:34008 CRL.RP No. 1328 of 2022

11. On the date 15-09-2023, the present learned

counsel for the revision petitioner - Sri.M.G. Riyazulla

Khan, as a proxy counsel for the learned counsel for the

petitioner on record, made a submission that the petitioner

would like to withdraw the revision petition as not pressed.

Even on the said day also, a reference was made to the

decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Damodar S.

Prabhu's case (supra) regarding payment of graded cost.

12. Today, the learned counsel for the revision

petitioner has filed a memo, seeking withdrawal of the said

revision petition as not pressed. The learned counsel for

the revision petitioner makes a supporting submission on

the lines of the memo. However, the learned counsel for

the respondent submits that he has 'no objection' to

permit the petitioner to withdraw this petition as

dismissed, however, without making any observation

regarding the alleged settlement.

NC: 2023:KHC:34008 CRL.RP No. 1328 of 2022

13. Since no application seeking permission for

settlement under Section 147 of the N.I. Act has been

made, this Court need not record the alleged settlement, if

any, as canvassed in the memo filed today. As such, it

would suffice, as submitted by the learned counsel for the

respondent to accept the memo to the extent of the

petitioner not pressing the revision petition. Accordingly,

in view of the memo filed today and the submission made

from both side, the present revision petition stands

dismissed as not pressed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

BMV*