IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.810 OF 2015

BETWEEN:

Udaya Shetty

S/o. Vittala Shetty

(Mother Muktha Bai V. Shetty)

Aged about 48 years,

Now r/at. Koppalakaravadi,

Kumata 581 343

Uttara Kannada District.

..Petitioner

(By Sri. Umesh Mulimani for Sri. S.V. Prakash, Advocate)

AND:

Yogesh Gudigar

S/o. K.G. Shamanna Gudigar

Aged about 42 years,

Sandalwood Artist,

R/o. Ikkeri Road S.N. Nagara,

Sagar Town 3 577401

Shivamogga District.

.. Respondent

(By Sri. Venkatesh Somareddi for

Sri.P.P. Hegde, Advocate)

****

This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to call for the

entire records, set aside the judgment and order passed by the V

Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga sitting at

Crl.R.P.No.810/2015

2

Sagar in Criminal Appeal No.273/2013 dated 08.07.2015 by

confirming the judgment and order of conviction passed by the

Principal

Civil

Judge

(Jr.Dn.)

&

J.M.F.C.,

Sagar

in

C.C.No.706/2011 dated 26-10-2013 by allowing this revision

petition; dismiss the complaint filed by the respondent against

the petitioner in C.C.No.706/2011 on the file of the learned

Principal Civil Judge (Jr.dn.) & J.M.F.C. Sagar, and pass such

other suitable order as this Court deems it appropriate in the

admitted facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of

justice and award cost of this proceeding.

This Criminal Revision Petition coming on for Final Hearing,

through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing, this day,

the Court made the following:

O R D E R

The present petitioner as the accused was tried by the

Court of the learned Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & Judicial Magistrate

First Class, Sagar, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the

<Trial Court=) in C.C.No.706/2011, for the offence punishable

under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

(hereinafter for brevity referred to as the <N.I. Act=) and was

convicted for the said offence by its judgment of conviction and

order on sentence dated 26-10-2013.

Aggrieved by the same, the accused preferred a Criminal

Appeal in the Court of the V Additional District and Sessions

Judge, Shivamogga sitting at Sagar (hereinafter for brevity

Crl.R.P.No.810/2015

3

referred to as the <Sessions Judge9s Court=) in Criminal Appeal

No.273/2013.

The appeal was contested by the respondent who was the

complainant in the Trial Court. The Sessions Judge9s Court in its

judgment dated 08-07-2015 dismissed the appeal, confirming

the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the

Trial Court in C.C.No.706/2011.

Aggrieved by the impugned judgments and order on

sentence, the accused has preferred this revision petition.

2. The summary of the case of the complainant in the Trial

Court is that, the accused being well known to him, had

borrowed a sum of `1,50,000/- from him in the month of March

2010, agreeing to repay the same along with interest thereupon

within three months. Since the accused did not repay the loan

amount within the agreed period, at the demand made by the

complainant, he issued a cheque bearing No.719054 dated

16-06-2010, drawn on Syndicate Bank, Ankola Branch, in favour

of the complainant, for a sum of `1,50,000/-. When the said

cheque was presented for its realisation, the same came to be

dis-honoured and returned with the banker9s shara <A/c closed=.

Crl.R.P.No.810/2015

4

According to the complainant, thereafter, he got issued a legal

notice to the accused, which was sent to him through Registered

Post Acknowledgement Due (RPAD) as well Under Certificate of

Posting (UCP). Though the notice sent through Registered Post

Acknowledgement Due was returned with an endorsement, <out

of station - intimation delivered - left3address not known= but

the notice s