- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9059 CRL.RP No. 490 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 490 OF 2024 (397(Cr.PC) / 438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: MANJUNATH GANAPATHI HEGDE S/O GANAPATHI HEGDE, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO. 283, 4TH 'B' CROSS, 10TH MAIN, RPC LAYOUT, VIJAY NAGAR, BENGALURU 560 040 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HITESH GOWDA B.J., ADVOCATE) AND: SATHISH GURUMOORTHI BHAT S/O POOJARI, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NO.10, KRISHNAPA KUTTI BUILDING, 3RD FLOOR, 9TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN ROAD, S.R. NAGAR, BENGALURU 560 027 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HEGDE VISHWANATH SUBRAHMANYA, ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S. 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE DISMISSAL ORDER PASSED BY THE LXXIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYOHALL UNIT, BENGALURU (CCH-74) IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.25162/2022 DATED 15.02.2024 AND THE ORDER OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE IN C.C.NO.53511/2015 PASSED BY THE HONBLE XVII ADDL. JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, MAYOHALL UNIT, BENGALURU (SCCH-21) DATED 01.01.2019. Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9059 CRL.RP No. 490 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER The order dated 15.02.2022 passed by the Court of LXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge Mayo-hall Unit, Bengaluru in Crl.A.No.25162/2022, thereby rejecting the application seeking condonation of delay in preferring the said appeal is under challenge in this revision petition. 2. Learned Magistrate vide judgment dated 01.01.2019 passed in C.C.No.53511/2015 convicted the accused / revision petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act and sentenced him to pay fine of Rs.20,00,000/-, in default, to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of 6 months. 3. The appeal preferred by the accused before the Sessions Court was accompanied with an application for condonation of delay in preferring the appeal. The learned Sessions Judge vide impugned order has rejected the said application, observing that the delay is not properly explained - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9059 CRL.RP No. 490 of 2024 nor the accused has produced any document in support of the reasons assigned by him for preferring the appeal belatedly. The medical document issued by one Jyothi Homeo clinic in support of the contention of the accused that he was suffering from ill health, was not accepted, observing that the period referred in the said medical document is during the pendency of the appeal and therefore, it is no way helpful to the case of the accused in proving the contention. 4. A perusal of the impugned order would go to show that, the application was filed for condoning the delay of 438 days in preferring the appeal. It is the contention of the learned counsel for respondent that in fact, the delay is much more than 428 days and even otherwise the learned Sessions Judge has rightly rejected the prayer to condone the delay by assigning proper reasons, as each days delay was not explained by the accused while preferring the appeal. 5. The learned counsel for revision petitioner has brought to the notice of the Court that initially the Sessions Court was pleased to condone the delay by allowing the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:9059 CRL.RP No. 490 of 2024 application and therefore, it was not proper in once again deciding the application and rejecting the same. 6. A perusal of the order sheet maintained by the Appellate Court shows that on presentation of the appeal, the Appellate Court vide order dated 18.07.2022, condoned the delay in preferring the appeal and stayed the impugned order passed by the Trial Court, directing the accused to deposit 20% of the fine amount within a period of 50 days. 7. It is no doubt, the Sessions Court has assigned reasons while rejecting I.A.No.1 seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal vide order dated 15.02.2024. However, the fact remains that initially the delay in preferring the appeal was condoned by the Sessions Court and the order of the Trial Court was also stayed subject to deposit of 20% of the fine amount. The learned counsel for revision petitioner / accused, would submit that the said 20% of the fine amount was deposited before the Appellate Court. 8. Having once condoned the delay in preferring the appeal, the Sessions Court could not have heard the application once again and rejected the same. The appeal should have - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:9059 CRL.RP No. 490 of 2024 been heard and disposed on merits. Statutory appeal would lie before the Sessions Court against judgment of conviction passed by the learned Magistrate in a case of this nature. The appellant has to be given a reasonable opportunity to argue the appeal on merits, particularly when an application seeking condonation of delay was allowed. 9. Respondent’s counsel has brought to the notice of the Court, the application filed on behalf of the accused before the Trial Court under Section 147 of the NI Act, signed by both parties, wherein the accused had agreed for settlement. 10. The above document is part of the record and therefore, it is open for the respondent / complainant to rely on it at the time of hearing of the appeal. 11. For the foregoing reasons, the revision petition deserves to be allowed, subject to payment of cost as the appeal was filed before the Sessions Court belatedly. ORDER i) The revision petition is allowed, subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:9059 CRL.RP No. 490 of 2024 which shall be paid by the accused to the complainant before the Trial Court on the next date of hearing. ii) Order dated 15.02.2024 passed by the Court of LXXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge Mayo-hall Unit, Bengaluru in Crl.A.No.25161/2022 is set aside. iii) The Appellate Court shall hear the appeal on merits. iv) Both the parties are directed to appear before the Appellate Court on 21.03.2025. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE LDC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 34 CT:SNN