IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100402 OF 2023 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS)

BETWEEN:

SRI. ANEES ISMAIL ANGOLKAR, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. H.NO. 311. MARUTI GALLI, ANGOL-590007 TAL & DIST. BELAGAVI.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SINDHUDURG MULTIPURPOSE CO-OP SOCIETY LIMITED, Digi tally ANGOL ROAD, TILAKWADI BELAGAVI signed by V R/BY ITS MANAGER, N BADIGER SHRI SHIVAJI S/O RAVAJI PATIL Location: AGE: 58 YEAR, OCC: SERVICE, High Court R/O. YELLUR, TQ. & DIST. BELAGAVI-590007.

of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DIWAKAR G. BHAT, ADVOCATE)

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 397 R/W

401 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 08.08.2023 IN CRL.APPEAL NO. 136/2023 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE X ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE BELAGAVI, AT BELAGAVI AND JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 18.04.2023 IN C.C.NO. 428/2020 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE V JMFC COURT, BELAGAVI AT BELAGAVI FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 138 OF NI ACT. AND ACQUIT THE PETITIONER BY DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT FILED IN CC NO. 428/2020.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)

Heard Sri.Madanmohan M. Kannur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Diwakar G. Bhat, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. Revision Petitioner is the accused who suffered an order of conviction for the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act(for short ‘NI Act’ confirmed in Crl.A.No.136/2023 and order to pay fine amount of Rs.86,000/- of which sum of Rs.85,000/- is order to be paid as compensation to the complainant and balance sum of Rs.1,000/- towards defraying expense of the State is the revision petitioner.

3. Facts in the brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the revision petitioner are as under:

3.1 A complaint came to be lodged under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. against the revision petitioner by the complainant alleging the commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (herein after for short ‘NI Act’) by contending that accused being the member/shareholder of the shareholder of the complainant-society borrowed loan amount of Rs.50,000/- agreeing to repay the same. Towards the repayment, cheque bearing number 386381 dated 29.12.2019 in a sum of Rs.76,880/- was issued which on presentation came to be dishonored and there was no compliance to the callings of notice. Thereafter, accused stood for the trial for the offence under section 138 NI Act.

3.2 Trial Magistrate following the dictum of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Indian Bank Association and others Vs. Union of India and others , noted that the accused failed to file any application under Section 145(2) to lead the defence evidence, considered the oral evidence of the complainant along with documentary evidence Ex.P1 to P12, convicted (2014) 5 SCC 590 the accused for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and sentenced as referred supra.

3.3 Being aggrieved by same, accused filed an appeal before the District Court, which on merits came to be dismissed by considered judgment 08.08.2023.

4. Being further aggrieved by the same, revision petitioner is before this court in this revision.

5. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner, reiterating the grounds urged in the revision petition contended that both the Courts have not properly appreciated the material evidence on record inasmuch as the accused issued the instructions of ‘stop payment’ and therefore there was no offence committed by the accused and sought for allowing revision.

6. Per contra, learned counsel Sri.Diwakar Bhat supports the impugned judgments.

7. Having heard the both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously.

8. On such perusal of the material on record, it is crystal clear that exhibit P1 cheq