IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2725/2013

BETWEEN:

SMT.SARVAMANGALA GURURAJ BIJAPUR

AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,

R/O.BYAHATTI PLOT, II CROSS,

DESHPANDE NAGAR, HUBLI.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI.M.L.VANTI, ADV. FOR

SRI.V.M.SHEELVANT, ADV.)

AND:

SHRI.ABDULSAB K. ANNIGERI

AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,

R/O.NOORJAHAN MANJIL,

GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.P.L.SATHYAMOORTHY, ADV.)

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) OF

CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE

JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 10.06.2013

PASSED BY THE JMFC II-COURT, HUBLI, IN C.C.NO.1905/2005

AND CONVICT THE ACCUSED.

THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR

JUDGMENT COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT

THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

2

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant

challenging the judgment of acquittal passed by the JMFC-

II, Hubballi in C.C.No.1905/2005 whereby the learned

Magistrate has acquitted the respondent/accused for the

offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable

Instruments Act.

2.

For the sake of convenience, the parties herein

are referred with the original ranks occupied by them

before the trial court.

3.

The brief facts leading to the case are that,

complainant is a business woman and had business

transactions with the accused. It is alleged that accused

has purchased L & T Machine (JCB) bearing No.KA-25/M-

8411 for a sum of Rs.10,50,000/- from the complainant. It

is alleged that he has issued a cheque dated 25.04.2005

for a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- drawn on Federal Bank, Station

Road, Hubballi towards partial discharge of balance sale

consideration. When the complainant has presented the

3

said cheque, it was bounced for insufficient of funds. Later,

the complainant has got issued notice to the accused

calling upon him to make payment of the cheque amount.

The accused has given evasive reply through his counsel.

Hence, it is alleged that accused has committed offence

under Section 138 of N.I.Act and the complaint came to be

filed under Section 200 of Cr.P.C.

4.

The learned Magistrate after having taken

cognizance has recorded the sworn statement of the

complainant and then issued process against the accused.

The accused has appeared through his counsel and was

enlarged on bail. He has also denied the accusation. Then

the complainant was examined herself as P.W.1 and one

witness was examined as P.W.2. The complainant has also

placed reliance on 19 documents which are marked at

Exs.P1 to P19. The statement of the accused under Section

313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded to enable him to explain the

incriminating evidence appearing against him in the case

of the prosecution. The case of the accused is of total

4

denial. The accused has got examined himself as D.W.1

and he placed reliance on 20 documents marked at Exs.D1

to D20. Further, the copy of Ex.P19 was also got marked

as Ex.C1, which was produced along with the complaint.

5.

After

having

heard

the

arguments

and

perusing the records, the learned Magistrate has come to

the conclusion that the complainant has failed to prove

that cheque Ex.P1 came to be issued towards discharge of

legally enforceable debt and hence, acquitted the accused.

Being aggrieved by this judgment of acquittal, the

appellant/complainant has filed this appeal under Section

378(4) of Cr.P.C.

6.

Heard the arguments advanced by the learned

counsel for the appellant/complainant and the learned

counsel for the respondent/accused. Perused the trial court

records.

7.

Learned counsel for the appellant/complainant

would contend that the judgment of acquittal passed by

the trial court is opposed to law, facts and probabilities of

5

the case. He would contend that signature on the cheque

is undisputed and