- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37611 CRL.P No. 8282 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8282 OF 2023 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: MR MEWADA HARSHADHKUMAR S/O CHANNABHAI, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/A NO.E/405, LANDMARK GREEN, IOC ROAD, CHANDKHEDA, GUJARATH-382424, DIRECTOR OF M/S MEWADA RENEWABLE ENERGY PVT LTD., …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AKASH R RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI VISHWANATH J S/O JAYARAM C, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/A NO.492, MUNESHWARA BLOCK, DEVINAGAR, RMV EXTENSION II STAGE, BANGALORE-650094 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. LOKESH S G, ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO i) SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 26.12.2022 OF THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37611 CRL.P No. 8282 of 2023 AND J.M.F.C., HOSAKOTE, BENGALURU RURAL TAKING COGNIZANCE IN C.C.NO.9471/2022 AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI ORAL ORDER Petitioner who is the sole accused has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him in C.C.No.9471/2022, on the file of Prl.Civil Judge and JMFC, Hoskote, Bengaluru Rural District Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Sections 138 of N.I. Act. 2. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to by their ranks before the trial Court. 3. In support of the petition, accused has contended that he is the Director of Company Mewad Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd, which is engaged in the business of underground cabling work. It bagged the contract from M/s Nagarjuna Construction Company ('NCC' - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37611 CRL.P No. 8282 of 2023 for short) Urban in the year 2021. When Mewad Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd. was out of Bengaluru, it decided to sub contract the said work to M/s Sneha Constructions owned by the complainant. Mewad Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd. used to regularly pay M/s Sneha Constructions for procuring raw material and payments to the daily wagers working under it. The cheques in question were issued to the complainant by way of security. Misusing the same and on their dishonour complaint is filed. 3.1 Without arraigning the company, the complaint is not maintainable against the accused. There is no application of mind by the trial Court before taking cognizance and hence, the petition. 4. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for petitioner has relied upon the following decisions: i) Aneeta Hada Vs. Godfather Travels and Tours (P) Ltd (Aneeta Hada)1 1 (2012) 5 SCC 661 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37611 CRL.P No. 8282 of 2023 ii) Himanshu Vs. B. Shivamurthy and Anr. (Himanshu)2 iii) Ramesh Nagarkoti Vs. Kedar Datt Purohit (Ramesh Nagarkoti)3 iv) Bijoy Kumar Moni Vs. Paresh Manna and Anr. (Bijoy Kumar Moni)4 5. On the other hand, learned counsel representing complainant would submit that accused is well known to the complainant since several years. In the last week of May 2022, accused approached the complainant for hand loan of Rs.9 lakhs to meet his family necessity. Accordingly, on 01.06.2022, complainant paid Rs.9 lakhs by way of cash. Accused has assured repayment within 3 months. After 3 months when he failed to repay the said amount and on demand made by the complainant accused issued 3 cheques for Rs.3 lakhs each dated 01.09.2022. However, when presented they were dishonoured "as payment stopped by the drawer". Despite issue of legal notice, the accused has neither paid the amount due nor 2 (2019) 3 SCC 797 3 (2021) SCC Online Utt 745 4 SLP(Crl)No.13133/2024 Dt:20.12.2024 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37611 CRL.P No. 8282 of 2023 sent any reply and therefore, complaint is filed. The loan in question was paid to the accused in his personal capacity. Though accused has issued cheques drawn on the account of Mewad Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd, it is a personal loan and therefore, arraigning the company as accused is not necessary and pray to dismiss the petition. 6. Heard arguments and perused the record. 7. It is not in dispute that accused is the Director of Mewad Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd, engaged in the business of underground cabling work. It has bagged contract from NCC Urban during 2021. In turn Mewad Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd has given sub contract to M/s Sneha Constructions owned by the complainant. Accused has claimed that he used to pay regularly for the raw material procured and payments to the daily wagers working under it and the cheques were issued by way of security. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37611 CRL.P No. 8282 of 2023 8. However, it is the specific case of the complainant that he has lent Rs.9 lakhs to the accused in his personal capacity and when he failed to repay the same and on insistence, he issued the subject cheques, which came to be dishonoured "as payment stopped by the drawer". The complainant has disputed that the cheques were issued on behalf of Mewad Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd and therefore, arraigning it as accused is not necessary. 9. Though the accused has produced photocopy of agreement of sub contract dated 15.04.2021 entered into between complainant and accused, there is no reference to the subject cheques being given by way of security. In the light of the specific defence taken by the complainant that Rs.9 lakhs loan given by him to the accused is a personal loan transaction and hand loan to meet the family necessity of the accused, it is a matter for evidence and at the trial it is for the complainant to prove that it is a personal transaction between the accused and himself - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37611 CRL.P No. 8282 of 2023 and as such arraigning the company is not necessary. On the other hand it is for the accused to prove otherwise. In the absence of any documentary evidence to establish the grounds urged, this Court cannot decide disputed facts in a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The decisions relied upon by the accused are not applicable to the case on hand and consequently the petition fails and accordingly, the following: ORDER (i) Petition filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 482 Cr.P.C is hereby rejected. (ii) The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial court through e-mail. Sd/- (J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE RR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34