- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6447 CRL.RP No. 100106 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100106 OF 2021 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: OMANKUTTAN GOPINATH PILLAI AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. H.NO.11/C, KANGRALKAR BUILDING, OPP. DR.GIRISH WAGALE CLINIC, 1ST STAGE, RC NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590013. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VITTHAL S. TELI, ADVOCATE) AND: SUBHASH S/O. RAJARAM KASHID, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. “MATRUCHAYA” BUILDING, 1ST FLOOR, CTS NO.221/2A/3, VACCINE DEPO ROAD, NEAR 2ND GATE, TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. V. VIDYA, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397(3) R/W. 401 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 23/03/2021 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.345/2019 BY THE VIII ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI WHEREIN CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT DATED 17/08/2019 PASSED BY THE VI-JMFC, BELAGAVI IN CC NO.578/2018, FOR OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 138 OF NI ACT AND THEREBY ACQUIT THE PETITIONERS / ACCUSED. MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.04.22 14:44:04 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6447 CRL.RP No. 100106 of 2021 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Sri.Vitthal S. Teli, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Smt.Vidya, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Revision petitioner is the accused who suffered an order of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (for short, ‘the N.I.Act’) in C.C.No.578/2018 and ordered to pay fine of Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation and sum of Rs.2,000/- towards the defraying expenses which got confirmed in Crl.A.No.345/ 2019. 3. Facts in a nutshell for disposal of the revision petition are as under: In respect of the loan transaction, towards the balance amount, a cheque in a sum Rs.1,37,242/-. Accused issued cheque at Ex.P.1 drawn on State Bank of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6447 CRL.RP No. 100106 of 2021 India dated 02.06.2018. The said cheque on presentation came to be dishonored for want of funds. 4. There was no compliance to the calling of legal notice, though there was a valid service of the legal notice. Accounts statement was marked at Ex.P.7 depicting the balance amount. The cheque amount and the balance amount did tally on taking note of the interest portion thereof. 5. Accused denied plea, evidence was recorded and complainant was examined as PW.1 and placed on record 7 documentary evidence. 6. In the cross examination of PW.1, it has been elicited that he was paying the amount to the bank though the loan was obtained by the complainant. 7. It is pertinent note that after taking note of the payment said to have been made to the loan account, balance amount is arrived as per Ex.P.7. 8. Therefore, even after applying the principles of law enunciated in case of Rohitbhai Jivanlal Patel Vs. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6447 CRL.RP No. 100106 of 2021 State of Gujarat and Another1, this Court is unable to accept the contentions urged on behalf of the revision petitioner that the trial Court and First Appellate Court failed to appreciate the answers obtained in the cross examination and allowed the revision petition. 9. Moreover, the presumption is not rebutted by the accused by stepping into the witness box and there was no reply to the legal notice. Pertinently, while recording the accused statement, accused made a submission to the Court that he would be examining the witnesses on his behalf; but failed to do so. 10. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that order of conviction recorded by trial Magistrate and confirmed by the First Appellate Court needs no interference. 11. However, imposition of Rs.2,000/- as the fine amount towards the defraying expenses of the State needs interference by this Court as lis is privy to the 1 (2019) 18 SCC 106 - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6447 CRL.RP No. 100106 of 2021 parties and no State machinery involved. At the same time, as against the cheque amount of Rs.1,37,242/- ordered to pay compensation in sum of Rs.1,50,000/- is justified and requires no interference. 12. Hence, for going discussions, the following order is passed: ORDER i. Criminal revision petition is allowed in part. ii. While maintaining the conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I.Act, fine amount of Rs.1,52,000/- ordered by trial Magistrate is modified to sum Rs.1,50,000/-. iii. Entire sum of Rs.1,50,000/- is ordered to be paid as compensation to the complainant. iv. Time is extended till 15.05.2025 to pay the balance fine amount failing which accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6447 CRL.RP No. 100106 of 2021 v. Imposition of Rs.2,000/- fine towards the defraying expenses of the State is set aside. vi. Office to return the Trial Court records along with a copy of this order for issuance of modified conviction warrant. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE AC CT:PA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 43