Karnataka High Court
Sri.Govind V Jathar vs Smt.Bhavani S on 6 March, 2024
Author: H.P.Sandesh
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:9304
CRL.RP No. 483 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 483 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
1. SRI GOVIND V. JATHAR
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
M/S. SRI GANESH TRADERS
PROPRIETOR
NO.B- 91, 1ST STAGE, 2ND CROSS
PEENYA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE
BANGALORE - 560 058.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PARAMESHWAR N. HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. BHAVANI S.,
Digitally signed W/O SRI V. JAGADISH KUMAR,
by SHARANYA T AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
Location: HIGH R/AT NO.49/C, SHANKAR MUTT ROAD
COURT OF
KARNATAKA SHANKARPURAM, BASAVANAGUDI
BENGALURU
REP. BY SPA HOLDER SRI V.UDAYA KUMAR
S/O SRI R. VENKOBA RAO
BENGALURU - 560 020.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. M.B.CHANDRA CHOODA, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 13.03.2020
PASSED BY THE LX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE AT BENGALURU (CCH-61), IN CRL.A.NO.212/2018 AND
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:9304
CRL.RP No. 483 of 2020
THE ORDER DATED 11.01.2018 IN C.C.NO.23222/2016 FROM
THE FILE OF THE COURT OF XVI ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU CITY AND
CONSEQUENTLY ACQUIT THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S.138 OF NI ACT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard The learned counsel for revision petitioner and
also the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
2. The present revision petition is filed by the
against the order passed by the Trial Court in
C.C.No.23222/2016 wherein the Trial Court having taken
note of four Cheques were dishonored to the tune of
amount of Rs.35,000/- for three Cheques and for an
amount of Rs.25,000/- for another Cheque. The Complaint
was filed. The Trial Court has taken the cognizance and it
is also the specific case that total 20 Cheques were issued,
out of that sixteen Cheques are honored and four Cheques
are dishonored. Notice was also issued, inspite of it,
accused has not paid the amount. Though the accused has
appeared before the Trial Court, he did not choose to cross
NC: 2024:KHC:9304
examine the PW1. The Trial Court having considered the
material available on record, convicted and sentenced the
accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of
Negotiable Instruments Act and imposed to pay a fine of
Rs.1,50,000/-. Out of fine amount so collected
Rs.1,40,000/- ordered to be paid to the complainant as
compensation and balance of Rs.10,000/- shall vest with
the State. In default of payment of such compensation,
the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for three
months.
3. Being aggrieved by the said order, an appeal is
filed before the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.212/2018.
The First Appellate Court having considered the material
available on record, particularly cross-examination of PW1
and not lead any evidence, confirmed the judgment of the
Trial Court. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present
revision petition is filed.
4. The counsel for revision petitioner would
vehemently contend that an opportunity has to be given to
the revision petitioner and the question of revision petition
NC: 2024:KHC:9304
does not arise and presumption has to be drawn according
to the circumstantial evidence available on record.
5. Per Contra, the counsel appearing for the
respondent would submits that no dispute with regard to
the availing of loan and also repayment was made, but
four Cheques are not in order and to that effect complaint
was filed and cross-examination was made. No scope for
revision.
6. Having heard the revision petitioner's counsel
and also the counsel appearing for the respondent and
also it is not in dispute that totally twenty Cheques were
given and out of that sixteen Cheques were honored and
four Cheques were dishonored. The fact that the four
Cheques were dishonored is also communicated to the
accused by issuing the notice on 18.08.2016 and though
notice was served, neither replied nor repaid the amount.
Hence, approached the Court. Having taken note of no
reply by the revision petitioner/accused and also no cross-
examination of PW1 by the defense counsel and also not
executed the Cheques which have been issued is also
NC: 2024:KHC:9304
admitted fact that out of 20 Cheques, 16 Cheques were
honored and 4 Cheques were dishonored. When such
being the case, no reason to remand the matter in view of
submission of the counsel, question of remanding the
matter also does not arise. Both the judgments of the Trial
Court and also the First Appellate Court not suffers from
its legality and its correctness in the absence of any cross-
examination and contra evidence and hence no grounds
are made out to invoke revisional jurisdiction.
7. In view of the discussions made above, I pass
the following:
ORDER
The Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
RHS
