IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100137/2015

Between:

Mr.Veeresh S/o Veerabhadrappa Gangammanavar,

Age:Major, Occ:Business,

R/o Sharada Homes, Near Sulladmath Compound,

Saptapur, Dharwad.

…Appellant

(By Sri.C.V.Angadi, Advocate)

And:

1.

Mr.Mallikarjun S/o Madivalappa Vantamuri,

Age:Major, Occ:Retired,

R/o Plot No.31, Vishwa Bharati Housing Society Layout,

Shivagiri, Dharwad – 580007.

2.

Mr.Parappa S/o Mahagundappa Hulakukki,

Age:Major, Occ:Retired,

R/o Mona Buauty Parlor, Plot No.32, 6^th Cross,

KIADB Laout, Near Tapovan, Dharwad-580007.

…Respondents

(By Sri.S.B.Hegde, Advocate for R1;

Sri.M.H.Patil, Advocate for

Sri.Prakash.S.Udikeri, Advocate for R2)

This appeal is filed under section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. praying

to grant leave to appeal against the judgment and order of

acquittal dated 08.06.2015 passed in criminal case No.124/2005

by the Principal Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dharwad

and to set aside the judgment and order of acquittal dated

08.06.2015 passed in criminal case No.124/2005 by the Principal

Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dharwad thereby

2

acquitting the accused for the offences punishable under Section

138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by allowing this

appeal and to convict and sentence the respondents – accused for

the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument

Act, 1881.

This appeal having been heard and reserved for judgment

on 16.09.2021, coming on for ‘Pronouncement of Judgment’ this

day, the court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the complainant under

Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. challenging the judgment and

order of acquittal dated 08.06.2015 passed by the

Principal Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Dharwad in Criminal Case No.124/2005 whereby the

learned

magistrate

has

acquitted

the

accused/respondent for the offence punishable under

Section 138 of NI Act, 1881.

2.

For the sake of convenience parties herein

are referred to their original ranks occupied by them

before the trial Court.

3.

The brief factual matrix leading to the case

are that the wife and children of accused No.1, children

3

of accused No.2 and complainant were the partners of

registered finance corporation known as ‘Sharada

Finance Corporation’. That the accused Nos.1 and 2 and

G.M.Pawate and N.B.Harihar and the father of the

complainant were partners of ‘Sharada Complex’,

Jayanagar, Dharawad which is a unregistered body. It is

alleged on 31.03.2002, the complainant and his father

came out of both the partnership firms with effect from

01.04.2002. When the complainant had retired from

Sharada Finance Corporation he was required to receive

Rs.12,00,000/- and his father when he retired from

Sharada

Complex

he

was

required

to

receive

Rs.14,55,000/- and the accused have agreed to pay the

said amount on behalf of their wife and children. It is

alleged that accused Nos.1 and 2 in their individual

capacity have issued the cheque of Syndicate Bank

dated 13.08.2004 of Rs.26,55,000/- in favour of the

complainant. When the said cheque was submitted for

encashment it was returned for insufficient funds. Then

4

he has issued legal notice, but the accused did not

responded for the same and hence, the complainant is

constrained

to

file

this

complaint.

After

taking

cognizance learned magistrate has recorded the sworn

statement of the complainant and after perusing the

records, issued process against the accused. Accused

Nos.1 and 2 have appeared and enlarged on bail and

they have also denied the accusation made against

them. Then the complainant has got examined himself

as Pw.1 and als