SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 12400

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D.HUDDAR

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.929/2015

BETWEEN:

M/S BHANDARY POWERLINES

PRIVATE LIMITED,

PLOT NO.3-B, INDUSTRIAL AREA,

MANIPAL - 576 104.

REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT

MANAGER, ACCOUNTS AND FINANCE,

MR. RAMESH N.

… PETITIONER

(BY SRI RAMA R IYER., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. M/S VICTOR ELECTRICALS LTD.,

PLOT NO. 08 SY. NO.855,

IDA, MEDCHEL,

HYDERABAD 501 401.

2. MANAGING DIRECTOR

M/S VICTOR ELECTRICALS LTD.,

PLOT NO. 15, PHASE IV (EXTN)

IDA, JEEDIMELTA,

HYDERABAD 500 055.

… RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI B.K. MOHAN FOR R1 AND R2, ADVOCATE)

2

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED

UNDER SECTION 397 AND 401 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO

SET

ASIDE

THE

AND

ORDER

DATED

24.06.2015

PASSED

BY

HON'BLE

PRINCIPAL

SESSIONS JUDGE, UDUPI IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.

34/2014 AT ANNEXURE E AND THE CONVICTION ORDER

PASSED BY THE III ADDL CIVIL JUDG E AND JMFC UDUPI.

PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AND RELIEF AS THE REVIEW

PETITIONER IS ENTITILED TO AND AS THIS HON'BLE

COURT DEEMS FIT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN

HEARD AND RESERVED ON 23.06.2023 COMING ON FOR

PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT

PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

The Revision Petitioner is before this Court assailing

the judgment dated 24.6.2015 passed in Criminal Appeal

No.34/2014

allowing

the

appeal

and

setting

aside

judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated

17.3.2014 passed by the III Addl.Civil Judge and JMFC,

Udupi in CC 1937/2012 sentencing the appellant-accused

for the offence punishable under Sec.138 of NI Act.

2. The parties to this revision are referred to as per

their rank before the trial Court.

3

3. That complainant now the revision petitioner filed

a private complaint under Sec.200 of Cr.PC against

accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offence alleged to have been

committed

by

them

punishable

under

Sec.138

of

Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter called as `Act').

4. It is the case of the complainant before the trial

Court that, complainant is engaged in manufacture of

enamel and vapour powered copper conductor/strips

products and also engaged in marketing and re-selling the

said products as per the demand did by its customers from

time to time. The accused being the customer used to

purchase these products. Accordingly, accused company

placed the orders without paying the amount towards the

consignment sent dated 7.2.2012 and 14.2.2012 with

invoice nos. 49 and 51 showing consideration of said

consignment

Rs.52,37,077/-

and

Rs.74,00,533/-.

In

respect of the said consignments, the accused company

issued cheque bearing No.827766 dated 30.01.2012 for

Rs.25,00,000/- drawn on State Bank of Hyderabad,

4

(20524)

MSME

Madchal

IE

Branch,

IDA

Madchal,

R.R.District, Rangareddy - 501 401. The complainant

presented the said cheque for encashment through its

banker-Canara bank ,Town Br., but, the said cheque

returned unpaid with endorsement `insufficient funds'

as

per

the

memo

dated

25.7.2012.

Thereafter,

complainant got issued statutory notice on 16.08.2012

bringing to the notice of the accused about dishonour of

the cheque with a request to pay the cheque amount

within fifteen days from the date of service of notice.

Despite service of notice, accused did not pay the cheque

amount nor issued any reply notice. Therefore, the

complainant was constrained to file a complaint under

Sec.200 of Cr.PC for the aforesaid offence.

5. After filing the complaint, learned III Addl.Civil

Judge and JMFC Udupi took the cognizance of the offence.

Recorded the sworn statement of the complainant and

thereafter, issued process against the accused. Pursuant to

the summons, accused nos.1 and 2 appeared before the

5

Magistrate, were enlarged on bail. Substance of accusation

under Sec.138 of NI Act, framed read over and explained

to the accused persons by the Magistrate. They pleaded

not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. To prove the guilt of the accused, complainant

himself examined as PW.1 got marked Ex.P1 to P11 and

also examined PW.2 by name Jnananda and through him,

exhibit P12 to 30 are marked. After closure of the evidence

of the complainant, accused nos. 1 and 2 were questioned

under Sec.313 of Cr.PC so as to enable them to answer the

incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence of

the complainant. They denied their complicity in the crime

and did not choose to lead any evidence.

7. After hearing the arguments of both the side, the

learned Magistrate found both the accused guilty of the

offence punishable under Sec.138 of the NI Act and

sentenced as under:

"….the accused is sentenced to undergo SI

for

1

year

and

to

pay

a

fine

of

Rs.27,55,000/-. Out of which a sum of

6

Rs.5,000/- sh

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top