Karnataka High Court
Sri.M.Narayana Swamy vs Smt.H.C.Rajamma on 6 March, 2024
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:9409
CRL.RP No. 1099 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1099 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
SRI M NARAYANA SWAMY
S/O MUNIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
HEAD MASTER, GOVT PRIMARY SCHOOL
MANGANAHALLI, ULLAL UPANAGAR
BANGALORE-560 110.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI NAGARAJA M, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT H C RAJAMMA
W/O N P SRINIVAS
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.424 H
7TH CROSS, ULLAL UPANAGARA
BANGALORE-560 110.
Digitally signed by B ...RESPONDENT
K
MAHENDRAKUMAR (BY SRI H N MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE)
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397(1) R/W 401 OF CR.P.C 1973,
PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET
ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE TRIAL COURT i.e., 22nd ACMM,
BANGALORE DATED 29.09.2015 IN C.C.NO.28587/2014 AND SET
ASIDE THE ORDER OF LOWER APPELLATE COURT i.e., LXVI ADDL.
CITY CIVIL AND S.J., BANGALORE IN CRL.A.NO.1326/2015 DATED
19.07.2016 AND EXAMINE THE LEGALITY, THE PROCEEDINGS
BEFORE THE LOWER COURT AND LOWER APPELLATE COURT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:9409
CRL.RP No. 1099 of 2016
ORDER
Petitioner is convicted for the offence punishable
under Section 138 of N.I. Act, and sentenced to pay fine of
Rs.1,000/-and also a sum of Rs.90,000/- towards
compensation being the cheque amount.
2. Sri H.N. Manjunath, learned counsel
representing the complainant is no more.
3. The complainant-respondent is before this
Court and has furnished a copy of the Aadhar Card
towards proof of her identity.
4. The respondent-complainant has stated that
the petitioner has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/-
towards full and final settlement of her claim, and the
petitioner-accused is present before this Court has handed
over a sum of Rs.50,000/- to the respondent-complainant
by way of cash. The receipt of which is duly acknowledged.
She has further stated that she has no objection for
quashing the impugned judgment of conviction in view of
the settlement.
5. The statement is placed on record.
NC: 2024:KHC:9409
6. In view of the above, the criminal revision
petition requires to be allowed. Accordingly, I pass the
following:
ORDER
The criminal revision petition is allowed. The
impugned Judgment and order dated 29.9.2015 passed by
the XXII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Bengaluru
City in C.C.No..28587/2014, and impugned judgment and
order dated 19.7.2016 passed by the LXVI Addl. City Civil
& Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City in Crl.A.No.1326/2015
are hereby set aside and the petitioner-accused is
acquitted of the offence Punishable under Section 138 of
N.I. Act. The petitioner-accused is at liberty to withdraw
the amount in deposit before the Trial Court.
The bail bond if any, executed stands cancelled.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HR
