- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5068 CRL.RP No. 100068 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100068 OF 2023 (397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: GAJANAN S/O. GANAPATI NAIK, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. MAHAGANAPATI OIL MILL BANDAR ROAD, HONAVAR, TQ. HONAVAR, DIST. UTTAR KANNADA, KARWAR. …PETITIONER (BY SRI S.B. DODDAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA (BY THE HONAVAR POLICE STATION HONAVAR), R/BY. S.P.P., HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 397 R/W. SEC. 401 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, U.K. KARWAR, DATED 03.02.2023 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 23/2011 AND SO ALSO THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF SENTENCE PASSED BY THE PRL. JMFC HONAVAR IN CC NO. 883/2008 DATED 28.01.2011 FOR OFFENCE P/U/SECTIONS 420, 464, 465, 465, 468, 471 OF IPC AND ALLOW THE PRESENT REVISION PETITION AND ACQUIT THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Date: 2025.03.29 11:50:47 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5068 CRL.RP No. 100068 of 2023 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri.S.B.Doddagoudar, counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Praveena Y. Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader. 2. Though the matter is listed for admission by the consent of the parties, matter is taken up for final disposal. 3. Accused to suffer an order of conviction in CC No.883/2008 for the offences punishable under sections 420, 464, 465,468 and 471 of IPC which got confirmed in Crl.A.No.23/2011 is the revision petitioner. 4. Upon the complaint received by Honnavara police, detail investigation has been conducted against the petitioner and charge sheet came to be filed by Honnavara police alleging the Commission of the offence punishable under Sections 420, 464, 465,468 and 471 of IPC. Accused stood for trial and after thorough trial, he has - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5068 CRL.RP No. 100068 of 2023 been convicted for the aforesaid offences and sentenced as under: “Accused is convicted for the offence under Sec.420 of IPC shall under go S.I. for 2 years. Accused is convicted for the offence under Sec.464 and 465 of IPC shall under go S.I. for 1 year. Accused is convicted for the offence under Sec.468 and 471 of IPC shall under go S.I. for 1 year. All the sentences shall run concurrently.” 5. Being aggrieved by the same, accused filed an appeal before the District Court in Crl.A.No.23/2011. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court after securing the records, heard the parties in detail and by considered judgement dated 03.02.2023, dismissed the appeal of the accused. 6. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused is before this Court. 7. Sri.S.B.Doddagouder, learned counsel for the revision petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the revision petition contend that incident as alleged against - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5068 CRL.RP No. 100068 of 2023 the petitioner is incorrect and he has furnished the necessary information to Co-operative bank under bonafide impression that the documents furnished to the Canara Bank could not come in the way of applying for the loan with the Co-operative bank. Therefore, accused has not committed any offence as is alleged and sought for allowing the revision petition. 8. Alternatively, Sri.S.B.Doddagouder would contend that in the event this Court upholding the order of conviction, taking note of the fact that the petitioner is a first time offender and conviction in 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act would not come in the way of accused being granted probation by the trial Magistrate and thus sought for showing mercy by enhancing the fine amount reasonably. 9. Per contra, Sri.Praveena Y. Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader not only supports the order of conviction but also sentencing the accused taking note of the fact that the accused is an habitual offender who has suffered many convictions under section - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5068 CRL.RP No. 100068 of 2023 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and also under Section 229(a) of IPC. Therefore, no mercy can be shown and sought for dismissal of the revision petition in toto. 10. Having heard the arguments of both the sides, this Court has perused the material on record meticulously. On such perusal of the material on record, admittedly, petitioner has suppressed the material facts that he had pledged the documents of immovable property with Canara Bank and while furnishing the declaration before the Karnataka Industrial Cooperative Bank for obtaining the further loan has suppressed the said fact and gave a false declaration that the original documents have been lost in a fire accident. 11. The said aspect of the matter stands established by prosecution by placing necessary oral and documentary evidence on record, especially the endorsements obtained from the Canara Bank. 12. Therefore, order of conviction recorded by trial Magistrate and confirmed by the First Appellate Court - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5068 CRL.RP No. 100068 of 2023 needs no interference, that too in the revisional jurisdiction. 13. However, with regard to the alternate submission on behalf of the revision petitioner is concerned, though revision petitioner has suffered an order of conviction under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in few cases and under Section 229A of IPC, it should not be construed so as to term the accused as a habitual offender. 14. Taking note of the fact that revision petitioner was in custody for a period of one month 20 days during the investigation period and also taking note of the age of the revision petitioner being 62 years as on today, enhancing the fine amount in a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- to be payable in two equal instalments, one instalment on 30.04.2025 and another on 30.05.2025 and setting aside the remaining period of sentence would meet the ends of justice in the facts and circumstances of the case. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5068 CRL.RP No. 100068 of 2023 15. Accordingly, following order is passed:- ORDER (i) Revision Petition allowed in part. (ii)While maintaining the conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 464, 465,468 and 471 of IPC, the sentence ordered by trial Magistrate and confirmed by the First Appellate Court stands modified as under:- a) Petitioner to pay enhanced fine amount of Rs.2,50,000/- payable in two equal installments, one on 30th April 2025 and another installment on 30.05.2025, the remaining sentence period is stands set aside. b) Failure to make the payment of enhanced fine amount as stated above, would result in automatic restoration of the sentence ordered by trial Magistrate and confirmed by the First Appellate Court. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5068 CRL.RP No. 100068 of 2023 c) Out of fine amount, sum of Rs.2,00,000/- is order to be paid as compensation to the Karnataka industrial cooperative bank which is now closed, to the account of the administrator or liquidator. SD/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE HMB CT:PA LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 9