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
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.