- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15324 CRL.A No. 579 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 579 OF 2020 (A) BETWEEN: MADHU STEEL CORPORATION NO.5 AND 6, MILLIA BUILDING N.R.ROAD, II CROSS BANGALORE-560 002 REP. BY GPA HOLDER OF THE PROPRIETRIX SRI. D.P. GUPTA SOUGHT TO BE AMENDED AS SMT. MADHU GUPTA @ MADHU BANSAL D/O SRI. D.P. GUPTA PROPRIETRIX MADHU STEEL CORPORATION NO.5 AND 6, MILLIA BUILDING N.R.ROAD, II CROSS BANGALORE-560 002 REP. BY HER GPA SRI. D.P. GUPTA …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRASHANTH H.S, ADVOCATE) AND: MR. C. BALAKRISHNA RAJU NO.58, 12TH CROSS LAKSHMAYA BLOCK GANGANAGAR BENGALURU-560 024 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. NIRANJAN GANIG N, ADVOCATE - [ABSENT]) Digitally signed by SHAKAMBARI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15324 CRL.A No. 579 of 2020 THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(4) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 26.04.2019 PASSED BY THE 42ND ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE BENGALURU IN P.C.R.NO.8916/2017 - ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF NI ACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is directed against the orders dated 26.4.2019 passed by the 13th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in PCR No.8916/2017 (Annexure-A) wherein, the learned trial Court rejected the application filed by the complainant seeking amendment to the cause- title and consequentially dismissed the complaint so filed by the complaint under Section 200 of Cr.PC. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. Despite service of notice on respondent, there is no representation for the respondent. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15324 CRL.A No. 579 of 2020 3. The facts so stated by the complainant in his complaint are: That he has filed a complaint under Section 200 of Cr.PC alleging offence under Section 138 of NI Act stating that, accused is known to the complainant and accused stood as a guarantor to one A.N.Kumar towards the material purchased by said A.N.Kumar for a sum of Rs.11,75,895/- from the complainant. Complainant is a proprietrix of Madhu Steel Corporation and running a steel business as stated in the complaint. It is stated in the complaint that, to discharge the said liability as guarantor, accused issued a cheque for Rs.11,75,391/- on 13.9.2014 drawn on Axis Bank Ltd., R.T. Nagar Branch, Bengaluru. When the said cheque was presented to the Bank, it was dishonoured for want of 'sufficient funds'. Thereafter, complainant issued the statutory notice as contemplated under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. As accused did not pay the amount, he filed a complaint through GPA holder of Proprietrix Sri G.P.Gupta. During the pendency of the private complaint, the complainant has filed an - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15324 CRL.A No. 579 of 2020 application seeking amendment to the cause-title by invoking the provisions of Section 460 of Cr.PC and sought for amendment as per the schedule so stated in the amendment application. 4. Learned trial Court on hearing the complainant has dismissed the said application on the ground that, no such registration certificate is produced to show that, the said complainant is the proprietrix of Madhu Steel Corporation and based upon that, now the complainant is before this Court challenging the said order of dismissal of the complainant. 5. The learned counsel for the complainant Sri H.S.Prashanth would submit that, due to inadvertence, the name of the proprietrix is not properly mentioned in the complaint and after noticing the same, the application was filed on 16.03.2019 seeking amendment of the cause-title but, the said application came to be dismissed by passing the impugned order. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15324 CRL.A No. 579 of 2020 6. It was the complainant filed under Section 200 of Cr.PC alleging offence under Section 138 of NI Act. Because of mistake crept in with regard to name of the prorprietrix, the complainant has filed an application seeking amendment to the cause-title. The learned trial Court rejected the said application, only on the ground that, no registration certificate is produced. As per the order sheet so produced along with the appeal memo, it shows that, the case was posted for sworn statement of the complainant and interlocutory application was filed seeking amendment. 7. According to complainant's counsel, it is not necessary to produce any certificate to that effect and the complainant is the proprietrix of Madhu Steel Ltd., and has filed an application in the capacity of proprietrix seeking amendment as there was mistake crept in the cause title. It is a clerical error as per the submission of the counsel for the complainant. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15324 CRL.A No. 579 of 2020 8. No doubt there is no provision under Cr.P.C to amend the pleadings. However, in view of the facts so stated in the application and in view of submissions so made by the counsel for the complainant as sworn statement is yet to be recorded, if the correction in the cause title is allowed, no hardship would be caused to accused-respondent. The respondent can very well take up all the available contentions with regard to the very status of the complainant in filing the said complaint under Section 200 of Cr.PC. alleging offence under Section 138 of NI Act. Though respondent appeared before this Court, but, no argument is advanced. This appeal is pending since 2019 without any progress. Even if the respondent is heard, no purpose would have been served. On technical objections, the learned trial Court has rejected the application. 9. In view of grounds so stated in the application, the said application deserves to be allowed, so also this appeal. In view of allowing the interlocutory application, - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:15324 CRL.A No. 579 of 2020 the matter requires to be remanded to the trial Court permitting the appellant to amend/correct the cause title and proceed further from the stage of recording of sworn statement. All the contentions of both the parties are to be kept open. 10. Resultantly, I pass the following: ORDER (i) Appeal is allowed. (ii) P.C No.8916/2017 is restored to its original file. (iii) Matter is remanded to the trial Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law from the stage of recording of sworn statement after amending/correcting the cause-title. (iv) Appellant to make necessary correction to the cause title as prayed. (v) All the contentions of both the parties are kept open. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:15324 CRL.A No. 579 of 2020 (vi) The complainant to appear before the trial Court on 29.04.2025 without waiting for notice from the Court. No order as to cost. Sd/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE Sk/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4