This revision petition is filed by the accused under Section 397

of Cr.P.C., challenging the judgment of conviction and order of

sentence dated 02.09.2013 passed by the II Additional Civil

Judge and JMFC, Shivamogga in CC No.215/2009 and

confirmed by the lerarned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court,

Shivamogga, in Criminal Appeal No.222/2013 vide judgment

dated 27.08.2014.

2.

For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are

referred with original ranks occupied by them before the trial

Court.

3.

The brief factual matrix leading to the case are as

under:-

The complainant and accused jointly entered into a

Memorandum of Understanding on 11.07.2007 and they have

agreed to contribute equally towards consideration of the

purchase of property. Accordingly, they have entered into an

agreement and accused agreed to pay Rs.01 Crore 80 Lakhs

and the complainant had agreed to Rs.20.00 Lakhs and over all

- 3 -

Rs.43.00 Crore payable. In the balance amount of Rs.43.00

Crore payable, the accused had agreed to pay Rs.20 Crore and

Rs.70.00 Lakhs and the complainant had agreed to pay

Rs.22.00 Crore and 30 Lakhs. Then, the complainant and

accused

have

jointly

entered

into

Memorandum

of

Understanding with one Anil Kumar M.N. for purchase of

property measuring 73.65 acres at Mandya National Paper Mill

Housing

Colony

at

Hulikere

Village,

Belagola

Hobli,

Srirangapatna Taluk, Mandya District, which is acquired by the

said Anil Kumar through successful bidding in Court auction.

The consideration for purchase of the said property was fixed at

Rs.45.00 Crore as per the Memorandum of Understanding

dated 11.07.2007. Both accused and complainant have agreed

to contribute equally towards consideration and on signing the

agreement, the accused agreed to pay Rs.01 Crore 80 Lakhs

and the complainant agreed to pay Rs.20.00 Lakhs. In the

balance amount of Rs.43.00 Crore payable, the accused had

agreed to pay Rs.20 Crore 70 Lakhs and the complainant had

agreed to pay of Rs.22 Crore 30 Lakhs. Towards initial

commitment of Rs.02.00 Crore payable together by the

complainant and accused, the accused had given two cheques

- 4 -

for Rs.90.00 Lakhs, which was drawn on Indusind Bank, Mysuru

Branch dated 11.07.2007. The complainant had issued

cheques for Rs.10.00 Lakhs dated 11.07.2007. The cheques

issued by the accused were dishonoured for want of sufficient

funds and the cheques issued by the complainant were

honoured. Due to failure on the part of the accused to pay

advance, the said Anil Kumar has cancelled the purchase

agreement and issued notice of cancellation of Memorandum of

Understanding. The complainant by alleging the breach of

contract, claimed liquidated damages of Rs.05.00 Crores from

the accused for his failure. But, mutual settlement in the

presence of mediators was finally arrived and in the said

settlement, the accused has agreed to pay Rs.01 Crore 60

Lakhs as liquidated damages to the complainant. A written

settlement deed was executed by the accused along with his

wife Mrs. Zeba Nazar on 12.07.2008. It is further asserted that

the liquidated damages of Rs.01 Crore 60 lakhs was agreed to

be paid by the accused by way of 13 cheques of which, 11

cheques of Rs.10.00 Lakhs each and two cheques of Rs.25.00

Lakhs each. Accordingly, the accused has issued cheques in

pursuance of the Memorandum of Understanding and the

- 5 -

complainant has presented one of the cheques ie., the present

cheque in this case and the same was bounced for Insufficient

Funds. Then the complainant has also issued a legal notice and

the notice sent through registered post returned with an

endorsement ‘Intimation Delivered, Not claimed’. But, the

notice sent to the other address of the accused was duly

served. Since, the said cheque amount was not paid, the

complaint came to be lodged. The learned Magistrate has taken

cognizance of the offence and issued process against the

accused. Thereafter, the accused has appeared and enlarged

on bail. The accused h