1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JULY, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201213/2020

BETWEEN:

Jahangir S/o Lalsab Nadaf,

Aged about: 53 years,

Occ:Real Estate Business,

R/o Afzalur Takke, Vijayapura,

Dist:Vijayapura-586101.

… Petitioner

(By Sri.Sanjay.A.Patil, Advocate)

AND:

Sri.Farooq Ahmed Abdul Razak

Inamdar, Age about 48 years,

Occ:Business,

R/o Near PDJ, High School,

Krishna Nagar Vijayapura,

Dist:Vijayapura-586101.

… Respondent

(By Sri.S.S.Mamadapur, Advocate)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of

Cr.P.C praying to quash the impugned order dated

18.11.2020 passed by I Addl.Civil Judge and JMFC-I at

Vijayapura in PCR No.268/2019 (C.C.No.3049/2019) on its

file, in the interest of justice and equity.

This petition coming on for Admission this day, the

Court made the following:

2

O R D E R

The petitioner has filed this petition under

Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the order

dated 18.11.2020 passed by the I Addl. Civil Judge

and JMFC-I at Vijayapura in C.C.No.3049/2019 (PCR

No.268/2019).

2.

The factual matrix leading to the case are

that the respondent herein has filed a private

complaint before the trial Court in PCR No.268/2019

against

the

present

petitioner

for

the

offence

punishable under Section 138 of NI Act. According to

the respondent-complainant the petitioner-accused

has taken a hand loan of Rs.9 lakhs on 10.09.2015

from the complainant in order to purchase a plot. But

the sale deed was not executed and when complainant

requested the accused-petitioner herein for repayment

of the amount or else to execute the sale deed he

issued cheque of Vijaya Bank, Vijayapura and when

3

the said cheque was presented on 27.02.2019 through

the banker of the complainant it was returned for

insufficient of funds. It is also alleged that thereafter

the complainant was got issued legal notice on

01.03.2019 calling upon the accused petitioner herein

for payment within 15 days of the receipt of notice

which was served on him on 08.03.2019 but he failed

to make any payment as such he filed a private

complaint under Section 138 of NI Act.

3.

The learned Magistrate after receiving the

private complaint recorded the sworn statement of the

complainant and after appreciating the documents

produced he has registered it in C.C.No.3049/2019

and ordered to issue process. In pursuance of the

process the present petitioner/accused appeared and

was enlarged on bail. Then on 05.02.2020 the

accusation has been read over and explained to him

and

he

denied

the

accusation.

Meanwhile

on

4

28.11.2019 itself before recording the plea, the

learned

counsel

appearing

for

the

complainant/respondent herein filed an application

under Section 143A of NI Act. On 05.02.2020 the

petitioner/accused through his counsel has filed

written arguments and on 26.02.2020 he has filed

objections also. The learned Magistrate on 18.11.2020

passed the impugned order directing the accused-

petitioner to deposit 20% of the cheque amount

before the Court. This order is being challenged in this

petition.

4.

Heard both the sides and perused the

records.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would

submit that the impugned order suffers from serious

infirmities, injustice and illegality as no opportunity

was given to defence even though objections were

filed. The Court below has not even applied mind

5

before passing the impugned order and the trial court

has erroneously passed the impugned order ignoring

the fact that the accused/petitioner has contested the

application by filing objections by producing certain

documents. But a cryptic order came to be passed

without proper appreciation and application of mind.

Hence, it is prayed for allowing the petition by

quashing the impugned order.

6.

Per contra the learned counsel for the

respondent though supported