- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14257 CRL.A No. 174 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.174 OF 2020 BETWEEN: DR. R.P. ABDUL GHANI S/O LATE P. ABDUL AZEEZ SAHIB AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT NO.06, ELAHI LANE, BRUCEPET, BELLARY 583 101 …APPELLANT (BY SRI ANISH JOSE ANTONY, ADVOCATE) AND: MR. SHOAIB ULL KHAN S/O ZABI ULLA KHAN AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/AT NO.13, IV CROSS, M D BLOCK, CHAMARAJPET, BANGALORE - 560 018 …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 378(4) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 09.10.2018 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND XXVI A.C.M.M., BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.16362/2014 AND ETC. Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14257 CRL.A No. 174 of 2020 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL JUDGMENT This matter is listed for furnishing of P.F. along with the copy of the appeal memo to issue notice against the respondent. At this juncture, the counsel for the appellant submits that co-ordinate Bench of this Court disposed of the similar matter and placed on record the copy of the said judgment dated 23.01.2020 passed in Crl.A.No.38/2019. The counsel for the appellant brought to notice of this Court paragraph 13 of the said judgment wherein discussion was made with regard to the question is as to whether the accused has issued the said cheques towards the legally enforceable debt. This Court observed that in this regard the accused have got marked two sale deeds at Ex.D1 and D2 through PW1. The said sale deeds are executed by the complainant and his daughter in favour of one Mr. N Khaleel and one Mr. Farooq in respect - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14257 CRL.A No. 174 of 2020 of the same property. It is clearly mentioned in the said sale deeds that the vendors have received the full sale consideration and they have acknowledged the receipt of the same. The execution of the sale deeds in respect of those persons have been admitted by PW1 in his cross- examination and the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that those two persons are the nominees and therefore the balance sale consideration is supposed to be paid by the accused in terms of the sale agreement at Ex.P6. Though, there is a mention in Clause-7 of the sale agreement at Ex.P6 stating that vendors have agreed to register the sale deed in favour of the purchasers or his nominees of the accused, however, there is nothing to show that the persons mentioned in the sale deeds are the nominees of the accused. When it is clearly mentioned in the sale deed marked as Ex.D1 and D2 that the vendors have received full sale consideration and they have acknowledged the receipt of the same, then, it cannot be said that the amounts mentioned in the cheques said to have been issued by the accused are legally enforceable - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14257 CRL.A No. 174 of 2020 debt as claimed by the complainant. This Court also taken note of the fact that in the statement recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., the accused has answered question No.6 stating that the complainant assured to give the site, however, he did not. 2. This Court having considered the material on record particularly, the recitals of the documents at Ex.D1 and D2 which are in the names of two persons who have received the sale consideration, comes to the conclusion that therefore, the complainant can claim the balance sale consideration which is liable to be paid by the accused in terms of the cheques issued by him and dismissed the appeal. In the case on hand also the amount mentioned in the Cheque No.132485 is for Rs.20,00,000/-. When similar issue was taken note of by this Court and also comes to the conclusion that recitals of Ex.D1 and D2 is very clear for having received the entire sale consideration, the question of admitting this appeal does - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14257 CRL.A No. 174 of 2020 not arise. Hence, I do not find any merit in the appeal to admit the same. 3. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following: ORDER The appeal is dismissed. In view of dismissal of the main appeal, I.As if any, do not survive for consideration and the same stand disposed of. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SN