- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23020 CRL.RP No. 1170 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1170 OF 2023 BETWEEN: MANJU K.C S/O CHANNABASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT KOTHALAVADI VILLAGE, CHAMRAJANAGAR TALUK AND DISTRICT, CHAMARAJANAGAR -571 123 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHASHI KIRAN V., ADVOCATE) AND: RAVINDRA BABU G S/O GURUSIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT MAJOR, R/AT NO.128, 3RD MAIN, HVR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 079 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI VEERAYYA HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAJASHEKAR K., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNER SECTION 397 READ WITH SECTION 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 14.03.2023, PASSED BY THE LEARNED LXVI ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU CITY IN CRL.A.NO.873/2022 THEREBY DISMISSING THE CRL.A FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 27.06.2022 Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23020 CRL.RP No. 1170 of 2023 OF THE IV ADDL. SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND A.C.M.M., COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AT BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.5970/2019 FOR CONVICTION AND SENTENCE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I ACT AND ETC, THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL ORDER This Criminal Revision Petition is directed against the judgment dated 14.03.2023 passed in Crl.A.No.873/2022 by the LXVI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru wherein conviction of the petitioner by judgment dated 27.06.2022 passed in C.C.No.5970/2019 by the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as “N.I Act for brevity) has been affirmed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23020 CRL.RP No. 1170 of 2023 3. The case of the respondent –complainant before the trial Court is that the petitioner –accused is acquainted with him through his common friends and he borrowed Rs.3,50,000/-(rupees Three Lakh Fifty Thousand only) for his marriage and business necessities during the month of January 2017 and promised to repay the same with interest at rate of 2% per month repayable within 06 months to one year. The complainant has paid Rs.1,95,000/- (rupees One Lakh Ninety Five Thousand only) by way of cheque on 28.02.2017 and Rs.1,55,000/- (rupees One Lakh Fifty Five Thousand only) by way of cash on 25.02.2017. Even after expiry of one year the petitioner –accused has not paid the amount borrowed and thereafter he issued cheque bearing No.000278 dated 10.07.2019 for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- (rupees Four Lakhs only) drawn in HDFC Bank, Chamaraja Double Road Branch, Mysuru towards discharge of loan. The complainant presented the said cheque and it came to be dishonoured for a reason “funds insufficient” under bank - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23020 CRL.RP No. 1170 of 2023 memo dated 17.07.2019. The complainant got issued legal notice dated 01.08.2019 by RPAD and same is returned as “not claimed”. As cheque amount is not paid, the respondent –complainant has initiated proceedings against the petitioner –complainant for offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I Act. 4. The complainant has been examined himself as P.W.1 and got marked documents as Ex.P1 to P6. The statement of the accused has been recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. The accused has not lead any defence evidence. The trial Court after hearing arguments on both side and appreciating evidence on record has convicted the petitioner –accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I Act and sentenced to pay fine of Rs.4,05,000/- (rupees Four Lakhs Five Thousand only) and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 06 months. The said judgment of conviction has been challenged by the petitioner before the Sessions Court in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23020 CRL.RP No. 1170 of 2023 Crl.A.No.873/2022. The appeal came to be dismissed on merits and confirmed the judgment of conviction passed by the trial Court. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that lending of Rs.1,55,000/- (rupees One Fifty Five Thousand only) by way of cash has not been established. The complainant who has been examined as P.W.1 has stated that he has not lent money for interest. The notice has not been served on the petitioner – accused. Without considering all these aspects, the trial Court has erred in convicting the petitioner –accused and Appellate Court has affirmed the conviction. 6. Having heard learned counsels, this Court has perused impugned judgments and trial Court records. 7. On going though cross examination of P.W.1, the petitioner –accused has not disputed the issuance of cheque –Ex.P1. As issuance of cheque has not been disputed, the presumption has to be drawn under Section - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23020 CRL.RP No. 1170 of 2023 139 of the N.I Act that the cheque is issued for discharge of debt. The said presumption is rebuttable presumption. The standard of proof for rebutting the said presumption is preponderance of probability. 8. The petitioner –accused has taken up his defence that he has repaid the amount borrowed. In order to establish the said defence, the petitioner –accused has not lead any defence evidence and not produced any documents. Therefore, the petitioner –accused has failed to establish his defence and failed rebut the presumption drawn under Section 139 of the N.I Act, even though P.W.1 has admitted that he has not lent money for interest at the rate of 2% per month. 9. Considering all these aspects, the trial Court has rightly convicted the petitioner –accused for offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I Act and the Appellate Court re-appreciating the evidence on record has rightly affirmed the judgment of conviction and order on - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23020 CRL.RP No. 1170 of 2023 sentence passed by the trial Court. There are no grounds to entertain this Criminal Revision Petition. 10. Hence, the Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE DSP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37