1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN

CRIMINAL PETITION No.1493 of 2020

BETWEEN

SRI ABDUL SATTAR,

S/O. LATE ABDUL SUBHAM,

AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,

No.55, ROBERTSON ROAD,

FRAZER TOWN, BENGALURU 3 560 005,

ALSO RESIDING AT No.17, FIRST FLOOR,

COLES ROAD, FRAZER TOWN,

BENGALURU 3 560 005.

&PETITIONER

(BY SRI MOHANKUMARA D., ADVOCATE throu9 PH)

AND

M/S. H.M. ESTATES AND PROPERTIES,

A PATNERSHIP FIRM CARRYING ON ITS

BUSINESS AT H.M. GENEVA HOUSE,

No.14, CUNNINGHAM ROAD,

BENGALURU 3 560 052.

REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNERS

1.

H.J. SIWANI,

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

2.

M.J. SIWANI,

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

BOTH ARE S/O. LATE J.K. SIWANI,

PARTNER No.2, REPRESENTED BY

GPA HOLDER PARTNER No.1.

&RESPONDENT

(BY DR. JAGADISH S. HALASHETTI, ADVOCATE throu9 VC)

2

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482

OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO QUASH

THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.No.17380/2009 FOR THE

OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF THE N.I.ACT

PENDING ON THE FILE OF XV ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,

through video conferencing, THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.1

under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the criminal

proceedings in CC No.17830/2009 pending on the file of

XV ACMM, Bengaluru, on the private complaint filed by the

respondents herein for the offence punishable under

Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short

8N.I. Act9).

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

counsel for the respondents.

3.

The case of the petitioner is that respondent Nos.1

and 2 filed a suit in O.S.No.8753/2006 against one

Doddabasappa and the accused. The said matter was

referred to Mediation Centre and a memorandum of terms

3

of agreement has been reduced into writing for settling the

matter. In that matter, the petitioner has agreed to issue

four cheques for the purpose of settling the dispute. Later,

the settlement failed, but the cheques issued by this

petitioner were not returned by the respondents instead

they filed a case under Section 138 of N.I. Act by filing a

private complaint. The Trial Court took cognizance

without referring to this matter and there is no legally

liable debt payable by the petitioner to discharge his

liability that attracts offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act.

Hence, the petitioner prayed for quashing of the criminal

proceedings.

4.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents

objected the petition on the ground that the petitioner has

already filed three petitions for quashing the criminal

proceedings. Two petitions came to be dismissed as

withdrawn and it is the third successive petition on the

same ground, which is not permissible. Learned counsel

submits that trial has begun and the evidence is

4

completed. Such being the case, there is no question of

quashing the proceedings. Hence, prayed for dismissal of

the petition.

5.

Upon hearing the arguments and on perusal of the

records, admittedly the cheques said to have been issued

by this petitioner in respect of the settlement have been

bounced and a criminal case has been launched by the

respondents

under

Sections

138

of

N.I.

Act.

Subsequently, cognizance was taken. The evidence of

PW.1 was recorded. Apart from that, statement under

Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded and the matter was

adjourned for evidence of defendants and accordingly,

DW.1

was

examined

and

got

marked

documents.

Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application for

recalling DW.1 for further examination, which came to be

rejected on 06.08.2019. The same was challenged by the

petitioner by filing Crl.R.P.No.682/2019, which also came

to be dismissed. Subsequently, this petition is filed on the

same ground contending that the or