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) 19680

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
K. NATARAJAN, J
SMT MAHALAKSHMI C – Appellant
Versus
M/S SAPTHAGIRI FINANCE (REG) – Respondent


Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case,

issuance of notice to the respondent is dispensed with.

2.

This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused under

Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for setting aside the order dated

06.01.2023 passed in Crl.A.No.484/2022 by LX ACC and

Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-61) for having rejected the

prayer of the petitioner for depositing 20% of the fine amount.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner faced the trial being convicted by the Magistrate

under

Section

138

of

N.I.

Act

and

imposed

fine

of

Rs.9,05,000/- and in appeal, there was a direction of the First

Appellate Court to deposit 20% of the fine amount within 60

days in Crl.A.No.484/2022 vide order dated 26.04.2022. But

the petitioner was not able to mobilize the fund within 60 days,

there was some delay in mobilizing the fund and finally, she

was able to mobilize the fund in January 2023 and she has

obtained the D.D. for Rs.1,80,000/-. But the Magistrate refused

to receive the DD. The demand draft also shown to this Court.

The D.D. which was ready to deposit was refused by the trial

- 3 -

Court on 06.01.2023. Hence, the petitioner is before this

Court.

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top