IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1063 OF 2018 BETWEEN:

MANOJ KUMAR JAIN S/O DARAMACHAND, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, MAHAVEER DIAMOND AND JEWELLERS, NO.12, ITI MAIN ROAD, K K LAYOUT, NAGARBHAVI 2^ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 072.

ALSO AT:

NO.4, 1^ST FLOOR, K K LAYOUT, 60 FEET ROAD, PAPAREDDYPALYA, BEHIND DEEP COMPLEX, Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI SERVICE ROAD, PARLATTAYA S NAGARABHAVI, Location: High BENGALURU - 560 072.

Court of Karnataka …PETITIONER [BY SRI GOPAL SINGH, ADVOCATE]

AND:

R.KIRAN KUMAR S/O LATE SRI RAJMAL JAIN, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NO.28/25, K V LAYOUT, SAPTHAGIRI RESIDENCY, JAYANAGAR 4^TH BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 011.

…RESPONDENT [BY SRI KUMARA K.G., ADVOCATE]

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 01.09.2018 IN CRL.A.NO.25/2017 ON THE FILE OF LII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU AS PER ANNEX-A AND ALSO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.12.2016 IN C.C.NO.5539/2016 ON THE FILE OF XXII ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU AS PER ANNEXURE-B AND TO ACQUIT THE PETITIONER OF THE CHARGE U/S 138 OF N.I.

ACT.

THIS PETITION IS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 04.11.2025, THIS DAY, THE COURT, PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI

CAV ORDER

Challenging judgment dated 01.09.2018 passed by LII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore (CCH-53), in Crl.A.no.25/2017 confirming judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.12.2016 passed by XXII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, in C.C.no.5539/2016, this revision petition is filed.

2. Sri Gopal Singh, learned counsel for petitioner submitted revision petition was by accused against concurrent findings convicting him for offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, ('NI Act', for short). It was submitted, respondent (complainant) had filed a private complaint under Section 200 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, ('CrPC', for short) alleging that complainant was a businessman and his friend Raju Pandit had introduced accused doing jewelry business as 'Sri Mahaveer Jewellers', in June, 2015, who had sought financial assistance of Rs.20,00,000/- from complainant, to develop his business. And on 24.06.2015, complainant had lent Rs.18,00,000/- at time of entering into agreement and Rs.2,00,000/- two days later. It was submitted, accused had agreed to return it within three months and on demand, issued two cheques bearing nos.406304 and 406295 dated 10.10.2015 and dated 13.10.2015 respectively for Rs.10,00,000/- each, drawn on Bank of India, Basaveshwaranagar Branch, Bangalore, which when presented for collection, returned with endorsements dated 12.11.2015 and 19.11.2015 as "funds insufficient" and demand notice dated 10.12.2015 was got issued by complainant, returned on 11.12.2015 with postal shara "door locked and not claimed", which substantiated commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act.

3. On appearance and accused seeking trial, complainant examined himself as PW.1 and got marked Exhibits P1 to P10. On appraisal of incriminating material, which were denied, statement of accused under Section 313 of CrPC was recorded. Thereafter, accused examined himself as DW.1 and got marked Exhibits D1 and D2.

4. On consideration, trial Court held accused guilty of offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act and sentenced him to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- to complainant and in default, accused to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. Aggrieved accused filed Crl.A.no.25/2017, which, however due to non-re- appreciation of material on record was dismissed, leading to this revision petition.

5. It was submitted, accused denied Ex.P10 - hand loan agreement in total. In absence of any of witnesses identifying signature of accused on it, reliance on same to convict