The petitioner filed a private complaint in CC No.729/2017

against the respondent for the offence punishable under Section

138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. As a counter blast,

respondent filed a private complaint in PCR No.157/2017 against

the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 406,

420, 506 of IPC and Sections 5, 38, 39 of Karnataka Money

Lenders Act and Section 4 of the Karnataka Prohibition of

Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004. The jurisdictional

Magistrate referred the complaint filed by the respondent to the

jurisdictional police for investigation under Section 156(3) of

Cr.PC. The police after conducting investigation submitted `B'

report. The jurisdictional Magistrate after considering the

protest petition and also sworn statement of the respondent,

registered the case against the petitioner for the offences

punishable under Sections 406, 420 of IPC. Being aggrieved,

this petition is filed.

3

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

jurisdictional Magistrate has convicted the respondent for the

offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument

Act and the same has attained finality. Hence, the registration

of the case for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420

of IPC arising out of the same incident is not sustainable in law.

3.

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the

jurisdictional Magistrate after considering the protest petition

filed by the respondent and also after recording the sworn

statement has rightly taken the cognizance of the offences

punishable under Sections 406, 506, 420 of IPC and the same

cannot be faulted with.

4.

I have considered the submissions made by the

learned counsel for the parties.

5.

Admittedly, the respondent has been convicted for

the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable

Instrument Act, 1881 by the jurisdictional Magistrate. It is not

4

in dispute that the same has been confirmed by the Learned

Sessions Judge.

6.

A perusal of complaint discloses that there is no

allegation

that

petitioner

had

induced

the

respondent

complainant to part with the cheque in question with a dishonest

intention to cheat the complainant from inception which is an

essential ingredient for registration of the criminal case for the

offence punishable under section 420 of IPC. Further the

jurisdictional Magistrate has already convicted the respondent

for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881. In view of the order of conviction passed

by the jurisdictional Magistarte, the respondent's counter blast

private complaint against the petitioner arising out of the very

same incident is not sustainable in law. Hence, the order passed

by the jurisdictional Magistrate taking cognizance of the offences

is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

i)

Petition is allowed;

5

ii)

The

proceedings

in

PCR

No.157/2017

in

CC

No.372/2018 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC,

Hosangara for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420

of IPC is hereby quashed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

BKM