IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 960 OF 2016 (-)

BETWEEN:

1. DAMODHAR S/O RAMA SHERIGAR, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT RAMA NIVAS, BALLAL NAGAR, MARPALLI, KORANGAPADI, UDUPI DISTRICT-574201 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P N HEGDE.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SURESH NAIK Digitally signed S/O.CHANDRAYYA NAIK, by SHARADAVANI AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, B Location: High P/AT TEA POINT, NEAR SRD, Court of Karnataka PRES CORNER, MANIPAL, UDUPI DISTRICT-574201 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.HARISH GANAPATHY., ADVOCATE)

CRL.RP FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 28.05.2016 PASSED BY PRL. S.J., UDUPI DISTRICT, UDUPI IN CRL.A.NO.76/2015 AND THE ORDER DATED 04.11.2015 PASSED BY THE III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC UDUPI IN C.C.NO.2037/2012 AND CONSEQUENTLY ACQUIT THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I ACT.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ORAL ORDER

Accused is before this Court in this revision petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C with a prayer to set aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed in CC No.2037/2012 dated 04.11.2015 by the Court of III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC which was confirmed by the judgment and order passed in Criminal Appeal No.76/2015 dated 28.05.2016 by the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Udupi District at Udupi.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Respondent herein had initiated proceedings against the petitioner for offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in CC No.2037/2012. In the said proceedings, the Trial Court had convicted the petitioner for offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to pay Rs.1,55,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months. The said judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court in CC No. 2037/2012 was confirmed by the Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.76/2015 by judgment and order dated 28.05.2016. It is under these circumstances, petitioner is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that the petitioner has probabilised the defence put forward by him and therefore, the Courts below are not justified in convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He submits that during the course of cross-examination of PW.1, his admission supports the defence taken by the petitioner. He accordingly prays to allow the petition.

5. Per Contra learned counsel for the respondent has argued in support of the impugned judgment and order passed by the Court's below and prays to dismiss the petition.

6. According to the complainant, petitioner had borrowed a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- from him as a hand loan in the first week of January, 2012 and towards repayment of the said amount he had issued the check in question bearing No.159030 dated 14.08.2012 drawn on Syndicate Bank, Manipal SIBM Branch, Udupi District for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- in favour of the respondent. The said cheque on presentation for realisation was dishonoured by the drawee bank with shara 'funds insufficient'. The statutory notice that was got issued on behalf of the respondent was duly served on the petitioner and in spite of the same, he had neither repaid the amount covered under the cheque in question nor had issued any reply to the legal notice. It is under these circumstances, proceedings was initiated against the petitioner for offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

5. The complainant has examined himself as PW.1 and had got marked four documents as Exhibit P.1 to Exhibit P.4(a). Exhibit P.1 is the cheque in question and Exhibit