Karnataka High Court
Sri Manjunatha Builders vs Sri I C Gopinath on 18 February, 2025
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:7083
CRL.A No. 1967 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1967 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
SRI MANJUNATHA BUILDERS
AND DEVELOPERS
OFFICE AT NO.1, RR BUILDING
BB ROAD, BETTAHALASURU CROSS
NEAR BANK OF INDIA ATM
JALA HOBLI
BENGALURU-562 157
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR
SRI. H.G. VIJAY KUMAR
S/O H.V. GOPALAIAH
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
RA/T HUTTANAHALLI VILLAGE
CHIKKAJALA POST
JALA HOBLI, BENGALURU 562157
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRA V, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by AND:
HEMAVATHY
GANGABYRAPPA
Location: HIGH SRI. I.C. GOPINATH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA S/O CHIKKAMUNIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEAWRS
R/AT NO.8, INDRASANAHALLI VILLAGE
HEGGANAHALLI POST
KUNDANA HOBLI
DEVANAHALLI TALUK
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 562157
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. NAGENDRA C.S, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:7083
CRL.A No. 1967 of 2022
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 378(4) CR.PC PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 22.04.2022, PASSED BY THE XV
A.C.M.M AT BENGALURU PASSED IN C.C.NO.2110/2020 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT AS NOT PRESSED
AND REMAND THE SAID COMPLAINT FOR PROPER
ADJUDICATION BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the complainant praying to set
aside the order dated 22.04.2022 passed in
C.C.No.2110/2020 by the XV Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bengaluru, whereunder the complaint has
been dismissed as not pressed on the joint memo.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and
respondent.
3. The appellant -complainant has initiated the
proceedings against the respondent -accused for offence
punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 (Hereinafter referred to as "N.I Act"
for brevity). During the pendency of the said proceedings,
a joint memo dated 13.11.2020 came to be filed and it is
NC: 2025:KHC:7083
signed by the appellant -complainant, respondent -
accused and their respective counsels. Based on the said
joint memo, the impugned order has been passed stating
that the terms of the joint memo appears to have been
complied and the complaint has been dismissed as not
pressed. The said order has been challenged by the
appellant -complainant in this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant -complainant
submits that the terms of the said joint memo has not
been complied by the respondent -accused. Therefore, the
dismissing the complaint based on the said joint memo is
not proper and correct. With this he prays to allow the
appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent -accused
submits that even though the respondent -accused has
not signed as consenting witness to deeds but otherwise
the terms of the joint memo are complied. With this he
prays for dismissal of the appeal.
6. The appellant -complainant and respondent -
accused have signed to a joint memo along with their
NC: 2025:KHC:7083
respective counsels and it is dated 13.11.2020. The joint
memo reads as under:
"JOINT MEMO
The above named Complainant, Accused and
their respective counsels submits as follows:
1. It is submitted that the above case is filed by
the Complainant against the Accused for dishonor
of four Cheques amounting to a total sum of
Rs.7,00,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Crore Only).
2. It is submitted that both the Complainant and
the Accused on the intervention of friends and well-
wishers have settled the matter out of Court,
wherein the Complainant has agreed to withdraw
the above case subject to the Accused singing as a
Consenting Witness to the deeds in respect of Sy.
No.4 measuring 5:22 (A/G) and Sy. No.3
measuring 0:17 (A/G) of Indrasanahali Village,
Kundana Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk before the Sub-
registrar, Devanahalli.
3. It is submitted that the Accused on signing the
aforesaid deeds to be executed on 17/11/2020 the
Complainant is ready to withdrawn the above
Complaint as not pressed/dismissed representing
that there would be no claim against the Accused in
respect of the subject Cheques.
NC: 2025:KHC:7083
WHEREFORE, both the Complainant and the
Accused in consideration of the above humbly prays
that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to dismiss the
above suit as not pressed/dismissed in the interest
of justice. "
7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
para No.2 of said joint memo has not been complied by
the respondent -accused. He further submits that he has
not signed as consenting witness to deeds in respect of
Sy.No.4 measuring 02 acres 22 guntas and Sy No.3
measuring 0.17 guntas both situated in Indrasanahalli
village.
8. Learned counsel for the respondent has placed
two documents on record namely agreement of sale both
dated 24.11.2020. The said documents pertains to land
bearing Sy.No.4 measuring 02 acres 22 guntas and
bearing Sy.No.3 measuring 17 guntas of Indrasanahalli
village.
9. On perusal of the said two documents, the
respondent -accused has not signed as consenting
NC: 2025:KHC:7083
witness. Considering the said aspect, para No.2 of the
joint memo has not been complied by the respondent -
accused. As para No.2 of the joint memo has not been
complied by the respondent -accused, the dismissal of the
complaint as not pressed stating that the terms of the
joint memo appears to have been complied is not proper
and correct. Therefore, the said impugned order requires
to be set aside and criminal case requires to be restored.
10. In the result, the following
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed.
ii) The impugned order dated 22.04.2022 passed
in C.C.No.2110/2020 by the XV Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru is set
aside. The criminal case No.2110/2020 is
ordered to be restored.
iii) Parties are directed to appear before the trial
Court on 20.03.2025 without awaiting Court
notice.
NC: 2025:KHC:7083
iv) The trial Court is directed to proceed with the
matter on merits.
v) Registry is directed to send copy of this order to
the concerned trial Court forthwith.
In view of the above, IA No.2/2022 seeking grant of
special leave is allowed.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
DSP
