- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19266 CRL.RP No. 349 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 349 OF 2018 BETWEEN: RAGHUCHANDRA M S/O MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS OCC: PETTY BUSINESS RESIDENT OF 2ND CROSS MALLESHWARAM ARASIKERE TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT 573103 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P B UMESH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. R B DESHPANDE.,ADVOCATE) AND: PRASHANTH K N S/O LATE K H NARASIMHAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/O 1ST CROSS HASSAN ROAD ARSIKERE TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT - 573103 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. H T JAGADEESH .,ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 23.11.2017 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19266 CRL.RP No. 349 of 2018 DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT HASSAN IN CRL.A.NO.198/2016 AND THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 09.09.2016 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT ARSIKERE IN C.C.NO.51/2015 AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL ORDER 1. This Revision Petition is filed under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. challenging the impugned judgment dated 23.11.2017 passed in Crl.A. No. 198/2016 by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hassan, whereunder the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed in C.C. No. 51/2015 dated 09.09.2016 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Arsikere convicting the petitioner for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as the `N.I. Act’) and sentenced to pay fine of Rs.52,000/- has been affirmed. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19266 CRL.RP No. 349 of 2018 2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondent. 3. Petitioner has admitted his signature on the cheque – Ex.P.1. As the signature on the cheque is admitted, a presumption has been drawn under Section 139 of the N.I. Act that the cheque is issued for discharge of legally enforceable debt/liability. Said presumption is a rebuttable presumption. Standard of proof for rebutting the said presumption is preponderance of probability. 4. The petitioner – accused has taken up the defence that he had borrowed a sum of Rs.50,000/- from the respondent – complainant and as a security he had given the cheque. Even though petitioner – accused has been examined as D.W.1 and even though the said aspect is suggested to P.W.1, said defence has not been established. Said defence itself indicates that there was some transaction between the petitioner – accused and respondent – complainant. In view of non-rebuttal of presumption drawn under Section 139 of the N.I. Act it is - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19266 CRL.RP No. 349 of 2018 to be held that cheque has been issued for discharge of debt/liability. 5. Cheque is issued for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-. The trial Court considering the fact that the petitioner – accused has admitted that he borrowed Rs.50,000/- from the respondent – complainant, has imposed fine of Rs.52,000/-. Even though the fine imposed is lesser than the amount of the cheque, said order of imposing fine has not been challenged by the respondent – complainant on the ground of inadequacy of sentence. In the Revision Petition filed by the petitioner – accused fine cannot be enhanced to the cheque amount or double the cheque amount to his disadvantage. Therefore, the sentence imposed by the trial Court and affirmed by the appellate Court requires to be maintained. 6. Considering the above aspects, the trial Court and the appellate Court have not committed any error in convicting the petitioner – accused for offence under - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19266 CRL.RP No. 349 of 2018 Section 138 of the N.I. Act and in imposition of sentence. In the result, Revision Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE LRS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 96