SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 25078

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE, J
SRI PURUSHOTHAM PATEL @ BABU – Appellant
Versus
SRI C.J. KUMARASWAMY – Respondent
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 238 OF 2023 | C.C.NO.538/2019 | CRL.A.NO.5038/2021



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. RAGHAVENDRA KATTIMANI M.
For the Respondents: SRI. K.O. VIJAYAKUMAR

Court affirmed the settlement between parties post-conviction under Section 138 and set aside earlier judgments, following mediation.

Headnote:This case concerns a criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioner was convicted for dishonor of a cheque. The appellate court upheld the trial court's decision. The settlement between the parties led to the court's acceptance of the terms whereupon the fines imposed were discussed.

Table of Content
1. understanding the petitioner's presence and the nature of the appeal. (Para 1 , 2)
2. case facts about conviction and settlement terms. (Para 3 , 4)
3. acceptance of the settlement and implications for previous judgments. (Para 5 , 6)
4. final ruling to set aside earlier judgments. (Para 7)

ORAL ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioner is present.

2. This matter was referred to the Mediation Centre to explore the possibility of settlement. The learned Mediator has forwarded the settlement report dated 16.09.2025. The petition is arising from the proceeding in C.C. No.538/2019 on the file of J.M.F.C., Srirangapatna and Criminal Appeal No.5038/2021 on the file of III Additional Sessions Judge, Mandya sitting at Srirangapatna.

3. In terms of the judgment passed by the Trial Court, the petitioner has directed to pay fine of Rs.5,15,000/- for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonour of cheque of Rs.5,00,000/-. The appellate Court has confirmed the conviction and sentence. Hence, the present petition.

4. In terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the complainant/respondent has received Rs.2,43,000/- on the date of settlement and Rs.2,57,000/- which is said to be deposited before the Trial Court has to be released in favour of the complainant/respondent. On such payment, complainant shall have no claim against the petitioner.

5. This Court does not find any impediment to accept the terms of the settlement.

6. The impugned judgment dated 30.11.2022 in Criminal Appeal No.5038/2021 on the file of III Additional Sessions Judge, Mandya (Sitting at Srirangapatna) and the judgment dated 12.10.2021 in C.C. No.538/2019 on the file of J.M.F.C. Srirangapatna are set-aside.

7. The amount in deposit before the Trial Court along with interest if any, shall be released in favour of the complainant/respondent.

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 Back to top