- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3835 CRL.P No. 103969 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103969 OF 2022 BETWEEN: SARVAMMA A AGE. 44 YEARS, OCC. HOMEMAKER, R/O. 2ND WARD, DEVARAHALLI N. MAHADEVARAPURA, TQ. CHALLAKERE-577536, DIST. CHITRADURG. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SACHIN C.ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND: HDFC BANK LIMITED 3RD FLOOR, MOHINDRA PLAZA, T.B.ROAD, DESHAPANDE NAGAR, HUBBALLI, R/BY ITS DEPUTY LEGAL MANAGER, MR. ANANDKUMAR C.R., AGE. 45 YEARS. …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT-SERVED) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO, ALLOW THIS PETITION AND QUASHING OF ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO. 1250/202 (PCR.487/2020) PENDING ON THE FILE OF III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC-3, HUBBALLI OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 138 OF NI ACT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3835 CRL.P No. 103969 of 2022 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner/accused has challenged the cognizance taken of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2. The respondent filed a private complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), alleging that the petitioner had borrowed a loan. Towards the discharge of the said loan, the son of the petitioner/accused issued a cheque in favor of the respondent–complainant. However, when the cheque was presented for realization, it was dishonored due to insufficient funds in the account. 3. Despite being served with notice, the respondent– complainant has not appeared in person or through counsel. Consequently, the respondent has been placed ex parte. 4. The Court has heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Upon perusal of the complaint, it is noted that the petitioner had borrowed a loan for the purchase of an Ultra Light Commercial Vehicle. The complaint alleges that the petitioner/accused was liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,03,680/-. To discharge this liability, a cheque for the said amount was allegedly issued, which was dishonored due to insufficient funds in the account. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3835 CRL.P No. 103969 of 2022 6. The petitioner has produced a copy of the cheque, which indicates that the cheque in question was not issued by the petitioner but rather by the petitioner’s son in favor of the respondent–complainant bank. 7. To constitute an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the following essential ingredients must be satisfied: • A person must have drawn a cheque on an account maintained by them with a banker. • The cheque must be issued for the payment of money to another person in discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability. • The cheque must have been returned unpaid by the bank due to insufficient funds or for other valid reasons specified under the Act. 8. In the present case, the petitioner is not the drawer of the cheque. The cheque was issued by the petitioner’s son from his own account, and not from an account maintained by the petitioner. Since the petitioner is neither the account holder nor the drawer of the cheque, the fundamental requirement to attract liability under Section 138 of the NI Act is not satisfied. Mere liability or financial obligation of the petitioner does not automatically make them liable under Section 138 unless they are the drawer of the dishonored cheque. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3835 CRL.P No. 103969 of 2022 9. In these circumstances, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner would be legally unsustainable and an abuse of the process of law. ORDER i. Accordingly, petition is allowed. ii. The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.1250/2022 on the file of III Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC-3, Hubballi is hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE TIN Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 86