- 1 -
NC: 2023:KHC:27849
CRL.RP No. 960 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 960 OF 2014
BETWEEN:
MR. IKRAM SIDDIQUI,
S/O MR. HUMAYUN SIDDIQUI,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.2278,
6TH CROSS, BASAVESHWARA ROAD,
KR MOHALLA,
MYSORE CITY-570 024.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PARAMESWARAPPA .C, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI. B. G. OMKARAMURTHY,
S/O B C GANGADHARA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
S. G. K. BETELNUT COMPANY,
SHIMOGA-577 201.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. DEEPAK .J,ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO
SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE
DATED:2.9.13 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. C.J. AND JMFC,
SHIVAMOGGA IN C.C.NO.1155/2009 AND THE JUDGMENT
DATED:27.8.14 PASSED BY THE P.O., FTC, SHIVAMOGGA IN
CRL.A.NO.219/13 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I. ACT,
1881.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
Digitally
signed by
RENUKAMBA
K G
Location:
High Court of
Karnataka
- 2 -
NC: 2023:KHC:27849
CRL.RP No. 960 of 2014
This revision petition is filed by the accused under Section
397 of Cr.P.C., challenging the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 02.09.2013 passed by the II Additional
Civil Judge and JMFC, Shivamogga in CC No.1155/2009 and
confirmed
by
the
Presiding
Officer,
Fast
Track
Court,
Shivamogga, in Criminal Appeal No.219/2013 vide judgment
dated 27.08.2014.
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 as
under:-
The complainant and accused jointly entered into a
Memorandum of Understanding on 11.07.2007 and they have
agreed to contribute equally towards consideration of the
purchase of property. Accordingly, they have entered into an
agreement and accused agreed to pay Rs.01 Crore 80 Lakhs
and the complainant had agreed to Rs.20.00 Lakhs and over all
Rs.43.00 Crore payable. In the balance amount of Rs.43.00
Crore payable, the accused had agreed to pay Rs.20 Crore and
- 3 -
Rs.70.00 Lakhs and the complainant had agreed to pay
Rs.22.00 Crore and 30 Lakhs. Then, the complainant and
accused
have
jointly
entered
into
Memorandum
of
Understanding with one Anil Kumar M.N. for purchase of
property measuring 73.65 acres at Mandya National Paper Mill
Housing
Colony
at
Hulikere
Village,
Belagola
Hobli,
Srirangapatna Taluk, Mandya District, which is acquired by the
said Anil Kumar through successful bidding in Court auction.
The consideration for purchase of the said property was fixed at
Rs.45.00 Crore as per the Memorandum of Understanding
dated 11.07.2007. Both accused and complainant have agreed
to contribute equally towards consideration and on signing the
agreement, the accused agreed to pay Rs.01 Crore 80 Lakhs
and the complainant agreed to pay Rs.20.00 Lakhs. In the
balance amount of Rs.43.00 Crore payable, the accused had
agreed to pay Rs.20 Crore 70 Lakhs and the complainant had
agreed to pay of Rs.22 Crore 30 Lakhs. Towards initial
commitment of Rs.02.00 Crore payable together by the
complainant and accused, the accused had given two cheques
for Rs.90.00 Lakhs, which was drawn on Indusind Bank, Mysuru
Branch dated 11.07.2007. The complainant had issued
- 4 -
cheques for Rs.10.00 Lakhs dated 11.07.2007. The cheques
issued by the accused were dishonoured for want of sufficient
funds and the cheques issued by the complainant were
honoured. Due to failure on the part of the accused to pay
advance, the said Anil Kumar has cancelled the purchase
agreement and issued notice of cancellation of Memorandum of
Understanding. The complainant by alleging the breach of
contract, claimed liquidated damages of Rs.05.00 Crores from
the accused for his failure. But, mutual settlement in the
presence of mediators was finally arrived and in the said
settlement, the accused has agreed to pay Rs.01 Crore 60
Lakhs as liquidated damages to the complainant. A written
settlement deed was executed by the accused along with his
wife Mrs. Zeba Nazar on 12.07.2008. It is further asserted that
the liquidated damages of Rs.01 Crore 60 lakhs was agreed to
be paid by the accused by way of 13 cheques of which, 11
cheques of Rs.10.00 Lakhs each and two cheques of Rs.25.00
Lakhs each. Accordingly, the accused has issued cheques in
pursuance of the Memorandum of Understanding and the
complainant has presented one of the cheques ie., the present
cheque in this case and the same was bounced for Insufficient
- 5 -
Funds. Then the complainant has also issued a legal notice and
the notice sent through registered post returned with an
endorsement ‘Intimation Delivered, Not claimed’. But, the
notice sent to the other address of the accused was duly
served. Since, the said cheque amount was not paid, the
complaint came to be lodged. The learned Magistrate has taken
cognizance of the offence and issued process against the
accused. Thereafter, the accused has appeared and enlarged
on bail. The accused has also
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.