IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 671 OF 2017 BETWEEN:

MR. DINESH KUMAR AGED 54 YEARS S/O K BABU, R/A "ANU DEEKSHA" BISHOP VICTOR ROAD, ATTAVAR MANGALURU - 575 002.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI P.P. HEGDE, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI GAURAV G.K, ADV)

AND:

MR. CHANDRAHASA ULLALA S/O ISHWARA ULLALA, AGED 61 YEARS PERMANENT ADDRESS "KANNANS NILAYA"

ANANGOOR,KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT,NOW R/AT Digitally signed THOKKOTTU,PERMANNUR VILLAGE by NANDINI M MANGALURU TALUK S DAKSHINA KANNADA Location: H IGH DISTRICT 505 017.

COURT OF KARNATAKA …RESPONDENT (BY SRI G. RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY, ADV.)

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED 24.03.2015 PASSED BY THE JMFC-V, MANGALORE IN C.C.NO.2093/2012, WHICH IS CONFIRMED AS PER THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.05.2017 PASSED BY THE PRL. S.J., D.K., MANGALORE IN CRL.A.NO.100/2015 AND ACQUIT THE PETR. HEREIN IN C.C.NO.2093/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE V-JMFC, MANGALORE.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ORAL ORDER

1. Accused is before this Court in this revision petition filed under Sections 397 read with 401 of Cr.PC with a prayer to set aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 24.03.2015 passed in CC.No.2093/2012 by the Court of JMFC-V, Mangaluru, D.K., and the judgment and order dated 31.05.2017 passed in Crl.A.No.100/2015 passed by the Court of Prl. Sessions Judge, D.K. Mangaluru.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

3. It is the case of the respondent that petitioner had borrowed a sum of Rs.5 lakhs from him and towards repayment of the said amount, the cheque in question bearing No.0177476 dated 27.12.2005 drawn on Union Bank of India, Hampanakatte Branch, D.K. Mangaluru, was issued in his favour for a sum of Rs.5 lakhs. The said cheque on presentation for realization was dishonoured by the drawee bank. Thereafter, a legal notice was issued on behalf of the complainant which was duly served on the petitioner. Since the petitioner had failed to repay the amount covered under the cheque in question, respondent had initiated proceedings against him for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I.Act in CC.No.2093/2012.

4. In the said proceedings, respondent had examined himself as PW-1 and got marked five documents as Exs.P-1 to P-5. On behalf of the defence, petitioner had got himself examined as DW-1 and got marked three documents as Exs.D-1 to D-3. The Trial Court after hearing the arguments on both sides and on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence available on record, convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act, and sentenced the petitioner to pay fine of Rs.5 lakhs and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The said judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court in CC.No.2093/2012 has been confirmed by the Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.100/2015 by judgment and order dated 31.05.2017. It is under these circumstances, petitioner is before this Court.

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the statutory legal notice was not issued within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of information about dishonour of the cheque in question from the bank. He submits that legal notice as provided under Section 138(b) of the N.I.Act is required to be issued within 30 days from the date of receipt of information from the bank, which is not done in the present case. Complaint filed beyond the period of 30 days is not maintainable in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SIVAKUMAR VS NATARAJAN - (2009)13 SCC 623. He submits that the defence raised by the petitioner before the Trial Court has not been properly appreciated in the present case and the courts belo