- 1 -

NC: 2023:KHC:44198

CRL.A No. 225 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 225 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

H.B. LINGESHAPPA,

S/O H. BHEEMAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

BUSINESSMAN,

R/AT NO.527, S.O.G.COLONY,

INDUSTRIAL AREA,

DAVANAGERE-577 001.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. M.R. HIREMATHAD, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M.G. SIDDAPPA,

S/O BASAVARAJAPPA,

HEAD MASTER,

HIGHER GOVT PRIMARY SCHOOL,

UJJAPPAVADERAHALLI VILLAGE,

JAGALUR TALUK,

R/O ALUR VILLAGE,

DAVANGERE-577 001.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. D.C. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE)

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO

SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED

25.11.2017 PASSED BY THE J.M.F.C.-III COURT, DAVANAGERE

IN

C.C.NO.27/2017

-

ACQUITTING

THE

RESPONDENT

/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I. ACT.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS

DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Digitally

signed by

SOWMYA D

Location:

High Court

of Karnataka

- 2 -

NC: 2023:KHC:44198

CRL.A No. 225 of 2018

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant / complainant

under Section 378(4) of Code of Criminal Procedure

(hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C' for short) challenging

the judgment of acquittal passed by JMFC III Court

Davanagere in C.C.No.27/2017 dated 25.11.2017.

2.

For the sake of convenience, the parties herein

are referred with original ranks occupied by them before

the trial Court.

3.

The brief factual matrix leading to the case are

that the complainant and accused are well known to each

other and with this acquaintance, accused approached the

complainant for a hand loan of Rs.2 Lakhs in the last week

of October, 2016 for the purpose of clearing old debts and

household expenses. He has agreed to repay the loan

within two months. Considering the need of the accused,

the complainant advanced Rs.2 Lakhs and accused on the

same day, issued a post dated cheque dated 21.12.2016

for Rs.2 Lakhs towards repayment of the said loan

- 3 -

NC: 2023:KHC:44198

CRL.A No. 225 of 2018

amount. When the said cheque was presented for

encashment, it was returned with an endorsement as

‘insufficient of funds’. Thereafter, the complainant got

issued a legal notice dated 05.01.2017 and inspite of

service of notice, the accused has not repaid the cheque

amount and hence, he lodged a complaint under Section

200 of Cr.P.C alleging that accused has committed an

offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act,

1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the N.I.Act' for short).

4.

The learned Magistrate after recording the

sworn statement and after appreciating the documents has

taken cognizance of the offence and issued process

against the accused. The accused appeared through his

counsel and was enlarged on bail. The plea under Section

138 of N.I.Act was framed against the accused and the

accused pleaded not guilty.

5.

The complainant got examined himself as PW1

and placed reliance on 8 documents. After conclusion of

the evidence of the complainant, the statement of accused

- 4 -

NC: 2023:KHC:44198

CRL.A No. 225 of 2018

under Section 313 of Cr.P.C was recorded to enable the

accused to explain the incriminating evidence appearing

against him. The case of accused is of total denial.

6.

The

learned

Magistrate

after

hearing

the

arguments

and

after

appreciating

the

oral

and

documentary evidence acquitted the accused for the

offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I.Act by

exercising his powers under Section 255(1) of Cr.P.C.

Being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal, the

complainant is before this court by way of this appeal.

7.

Heard the arguments advanced by the learned

counsel for the appellant. The learned counsel for the

respondent did not app