##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21162 CRL.RP No. 1488 of 2022

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1488 OF 2022 (397(Cr.PC) / 438(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

1. MANJACHAR S/O BASAVACHAR

NOW AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS AGRICULTURIST

R/O MUNIYUR VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI

TURUVEKERE TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT 572101

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKARA K A.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally 1. K P KRISHNAREDDY signed by R MANJUNA THA S/O LT POLANNA REDDY

Location: NOW AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS HIGH COURT OF R/O BESIDE BDO OFFICE KARNATAKA

DABBEGATTA ROAD TURUVEKERE TOWN

TUMAKURU DISTRICT 572101 …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. SRINIVASA M G., ADVOCATE - ABSENT

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

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21162 CRL.RP No. 1488 of 2022

HC-KAR

JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DATED 23.03.2021 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., TURUVEKERE IN C.C.NO.05/2017 AND CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TIPTUR IN CRL.A.NO.10007/2021 DATED 26.09.2022 AND ACQUIT THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE

P/U/S 138 OF N.I. ACT.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri Chandrashekara K.A., learned counsel for the

petitioner. None appears for the respondent.

2. Revision petitioner who has suffered an order of

conviction for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) in C.C.No.5/2017

and confirmed in Crl.A.No.10007/2021 is before this Court.

3. Facts of the case which are utmost necessary for

disposal of the present petition are as under:

4. A private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C.

came to be filed alleging the commission of the offence

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21162 CRL.RP No. 1488 of 2022

HC-KAR

punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act against the revision petitioner by the complainant contending that accused had availed hand loan for purchase of the property and to meet the household expenses in a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- with a promise to repay the same. Towards the repayment, he issued a cheque bearing No.780315 drawn on Karnataka Bank Ltd., dated 31.08.2016 which, on presentation, came to be dishonored with an endorsement, 'Drawer's signature differs from specimen filed in this office and Funds insufficient'. There was no response to the notice. Thereafter, complainant sought for

action.

5. Learned Trial Magistrate after completing the

necessary formalities secured the presence of the accused and recorded plea. Accused pleaded not guilty, and therefore, trial

was held.

6. In order to prove the case of the complainant, he

got examined himself as PW1 and one witness by name Shankaralingegowda as PW2 and placed on record six documentary evidence which were exhibited and marked as Exs.P1 to P6. There was no useful material in the cross-

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21162 CRL.RP No. 1488 of 2022

HC-KAR

examination of PW1 and PW2, but accused has failed to examine himself nor place any material evidence on record, so as to rebut the presumption available to the complainant under Section 139 of the NI Act, which resulted in conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act and ordered to pay fine amount of Rs.2,55,000/-. The order of the conviction was challenged before the First Appellate

Court in Criminal Appeal No.10007/2021.

7. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court after

securing the records heard the arguments of the parties in detail and on re-appreciation of the material evidence on record dismissed the appeal. Being further aggrieved by the same,

accused is before this Court in this revision petition.

8. Sri K.A.Chandrasekhara, learned counsel for the

revision petitioner by reiterating the grounds urged in the petition would vehemently contend that when the cheque has been dishonoured w