Back
2017 Supreme(Kar) 789
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA, J.
M/s. Yash Investment Consultants and Another – Petitioners
Versus
Kartik Ravichander and Another – Respondents
Criminal Petition Nos. 1058 to 1065 of 2017
Decided On : 17-04-2017
For the Petitioners: K. Puneeth, R. Nataraj.
For the Respondents: Shishira Amarnath, Vishwanath.
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 482 - Order 23 Rule 3 CPC - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138,147 - Legal Services Authority Act - Section 21 - Dishonor of Cheque - Quashing of Order - Respondent filed eight private complaints against the petitioners under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 alleging dishonour of eight separate cheques issued by petitioner of total value of Addl Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Bengaluru City took cognizance of offence recorded sworn statement of respondent in each case and issued summons to petitioners returnable by - However before scheduled date of appearance itself respondent got case advanced and on same day petitioner appeared before Court and a submission was made before learned Magistrate that at intervention of conciliators parties have amicably settled matter and both parties filed joint memos before Court and learned Magistrate passed identical orders in following cases - Whether Learned Judge who has entertained this matter was aware of elementary aspects of judicial functioning and Lok Adalath - Held, Court do not understand as to why matter was sent to Lok Adalat when parties had settled the matter between themselves and application to this effect was filed in Court - In such a situation Court could have passed order itself instead of relegating matter to Lok Adalat - Court have ourselves highlighted importance and significance of institution of Lok Adalat - Court would be failing in our duty if we do not mention that of late there is some criticism as well which, inter alia relates to manner in which cases are posted before the Lok Adalats - We have to devise methods to ensure that faith in system is maintained as in holistic terms access to justice is achieved through this system - We therefore deprecate this tendency of referring even those matters to Lok Adalat which have already been settled - This tendency of sending settled matters to Lok Adalats just to inflate figures of decision/settlement therein for statistical purposes is not a healthy practice - We are also not oblivious of criticism from lawyers intelligentsia and general public in adopting this kind of methodology for window-dressing and showing lucrative outcome of particular Lok Adalats - Even this Court had an occasion to consider one such similar instance in case of ILR Karnataka 2051 - Paragraph of said judgment is worth reproducing - Petitions are partly allowed
JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA, J.
1. As the question involved in all these cases is similar, these petitions are heard and disposed of by a common order.
2. The respondent herein filed eight private complaints against the petitioners under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short the N.I. Act) alleging dishonour of eight separate cheques issued by the petitioner no. 2 of the total value of Rs. 41,31,98,976/-. The XIX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City, took cognizance of the offence, recorded the sworn statement of the respondent in each case and issued summons to the petitioners returnable by 25.10.2016. However, before the scheduled date of appearance, on 20.10.2016 itself, the respondent got the case advanced and on the same day, the petitioner no. 2 appeared before the Court and a submission was made before the learned Magistrate that at the intervention of the conciliators, the parties have amicably settled the matter and both the parties filed joint memos before the Court and the learned Magistrate on 20.10.2016 passed identical orders in following cases:-
C.C. No. 16756/2016, C.C. No. 16757/2016, C.C. No. 16759/2016, C.C. No. 16761/2016, C.C. No. 16762/2016 and C.C. No. 16758/2016
Complainant present.
Accused present.
The complainant and accused have submitted that in the intervention of the conciliators they have amicably settled the matter for Rs. 5,00,00,000/- towards total cheque amount of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- (Five Crores).
Both the parties jointly filed joint memo by stating that they have settled the matter for Rs. 5,00,00,000/-.
Both parties have been duly represented by learned respective counsels.
As the parties have settled the matter, office to refer the case before Lok-Adalath for orders on 05.11.2016.
As the matter has been settled between the parties today the accused released on self-bond for Rs. 50,00,000/-.
Office to take bond.
In C.C. No. 16760/2016, on 20.10.2016, the learned Magistrate passed the following order:-
Complainant present.
Accused present.
The complainant and accused have submitted that in the intervention of the conciliators they have amicably settled the matter for Rs. 5,48,69,376/- towards total cheque amount of Rs. 5,48,69,376/-.
Both the parties jointly filed joint memo by stating that they have settled the matter for Rs. 5,48,69,376/-.
Both parties have been duly represented by learned respective counsels.
As the parties have settled the matter, office to refer the case before Lok-Adalath for orders on 05.11.2016.
As the matter has been settled between the parties today the accused released on self-bond for Rs. 50,00,000/-.
Office to take bond.
The order dated on 20.10.2016 in C.C. No. 16763/2016 reads as under:-
Complainant present.
Accused present.
The complainant and accused have submitted that in the intervention of the conciliators they have amicably settled the matter for Rs. 5,83,29,600/- towards total cheque amount of Rs. 5,83,29,600/-.
Both the parties jointly filed joint memo by stating that they have settled the matter for Rs. 5,83,29,600/-.
Both parties have been duly represented by learned respective counsels.
As the parties have settled the matter, office to refer the case before Lok-Adalath for orders on 05.11.2016.
As the matter has been settled between the parties today the accused released on self-bond for Rs. 50,00,000/-.
Office to take bond.
3. Thereafter, on 5.11.2016, both the parties along with their counsel appeared before the Lok Adalath and admitted the execution of the joint memos. The Lok Adalath accepted the joint memos and consequently, dismissed the individual complaints as withdrawn and the petitioners/accused Nos. 1 and 2 were discharged of the offence punishable under section 138 of the N.I. Act. The order sheet reveals that on 23.12.2016, the cases were advanced on board at the instance of the respondent and the learned counsel appearin
