- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39787 CRL.A No. 60 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.60 OF 2025 (A) BETWEEN: M/S CLASSIC FINCORP REG. HAVING ITS REGD.OFFICE AT NO.2080, GROUND FLOOR, 38TH CROSS, EAST END B MAIN ROAD, 9th BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 069. REP. BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY SRI. AGNYEA, SHETTY, S/O DINAKARA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS …APPELLANT (BY SRI. JEEVAN K., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI CHITTI BABU K., S/O KRISHNAPPA, CARRYING ON BUSINESS AT JAIVIK ENTERPRISES, NO.38, 1ST FLOOR, ANJANEYA SWAMY MAIN ROAD, CHANNAPPA LAYOUT, OPP. TO MORE MEGA STORE, MAHADEVAPURA, BENGALURU-560 048 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. BHASKAR C.R., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39787 CRL.A No. 60 of 2025 THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 378(4) CR.P.C. (FILED U/S 419(4) BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND THE ORDER OF ACQUITTAL PASSED BY THE LEARNED XXV ACJM AT BENGALURU IN C.C. NO.17956/2023 DATED 07.11.2024 AND MAY BE PLEASED TO CONVICT THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S/ 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN ADMISSION, AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard on the admission of the matter. 2. The appellant-M/s Classic Fincorp has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by the XXV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore in C.C.No.17956/2023 dated 07.11.2024. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their status before the trial Court. 4. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that the complainant being the registered finance corporation has lent the loan to the accused and his friends namely - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39787 CRL.A No. 60 of 2025 Gajendra Kumar S., Rohitha A.B., M.C. Yadav Kumar and accused friend Gajendra Kumar's mother N.Jaya and obtained on demand promissory note, consideration receipt and undertaking letter, loan application, Form No.6 and etc. Accused friends Rohitha A.B., M.C. Yadav Kumar and Gajendra Kumar's mother N.Jaya are the guarantors for prompt repayment of the said loan obtained by one Gajendra Kumar. But all of them failed to clear the loan. Towards repayment of the said loan, accused issued a cheque bearing No.685250 dated 27.04.2023 drawn on State Bank of India, Subbaiah Layout Branch, Bangalore for a sum of Rs.10,04,273/-. The said cheque on presentation, returned with an endorsement 'funds insufficient'. 5. On 23.05.2023, complainant got issued legal notice through his Advocate. Same was served on the accused on 29.05.2023. There was no reply given by the accused. Hence, the complainant filed the complaint. After taking cognizance, the Trial Court issued summons to the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39787 CRL.A No. 60 of 2025 accused. In response to the summons, accused appeared before the Court and statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C Statement was recorded. Accused pleaded not guilty and therefore, trial was held. 6. To prove the case of the complainant, one witness was examined as P.W.1 and documents got marked as Exs.P.1 to P.27. On closure of the evidence of the complainant, statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded. The accused has denied the evidence of PW.1. In the statement, he has stated that the complainant assured for granting of loan amount but did not sanction. Without sanctioning of loan they have taken the cheque towards ECS payment. 7. On perusal of the materials, the Trial Court had acquitted the accused. It is the case of the complainant that the accused is not a principal debtor and is only a guarantor. The document produced by the complainant reveals that the complainant had lent a loan to the principal debtor on 28.11.2022. On demand promissory - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39787 CRL.A No. 60 of 2025 note and consideration receipt marked at Exs.P.24 & 25 reveals that the principal debtors - Jaya and Chitti Babu jointly executed this consideration receipt on 25.11.2022. 8. Ex.27-statement of PL Account No.3736 reveals that this statement is pertaining tE2o accused No.1- Gajendra Kumar S., accused No.2 - N. Jaya, accused No.3 - Chitti Babu K., accused No.4 - Rohitha A.B. and accused No.5 - M.C. Yadav Kumar. The complainant has not placed any materials to show that the statement of P.L. Account No.3736 is pertaining to the Gajendra Kumar or of all above five persons. 9. The complainant has not deposed anything about on which date the complainant has demanded loan amount of Gajendra Kumar S. PW-1 has deposed that on 27.04.2023, accused had issued the cheque. If really the accused had issued the cheque on 27.04.2023, the complainant ought to have issued the challan. In respect of the cheque, as the complainant is a financial company has to maintain all the records and has to pay the money - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39787 CRL.A No. 60 of 2025 through cash/cheque/DD etc. In the absence of said material evidence, the evidence of PW.1 cannot be accepted. 10. The Trial Court has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court and properly appreciated the evidence on record in accordance with law and facts and acquitted the accused. On re-appreciation of the evidence record, I do not find any error/legal infirmities in the interim judgment of the acquittal passed by the trial Court. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER Appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE TMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30