- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6176 CRL.P No. 103844 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103844 OF 2022 BETWEEN: SRI. BASANAGOUDA Y. PATIL, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: PLOT AREA, MORAB, TQ: NAVALAGUND DIST: DHARWAD – 580 112. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S R HEGDE & SRI. SAYAR S. HEGDE, ADVOCATES) AND: SRI. SHEKHARAPPA S/O. CHANNAPPA SHIVALLI, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, OCC: RETIRED TEACHER, R/O: H.NO.37, DESHAPANDE LAYOUT, MAYUR EXTENSION, KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD – 580 029. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRASHANT S. KADADEVAR, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO. 2190/2022 ON THE FILE OF J.M.F.C. I COURT HUBBALLI FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF NI ACT WITH RESPECT TO PRESENT PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO. 1 IS CONCERN VIDE ANNEXURE-C WITH HEAVY COSTS. ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE RELIEF THAT, THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS JUST AND PROPER IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MAY PLEASE BE PASSED, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6176 CRL.P No. 103844 of 2022 ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by petitioner - accused No.1 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.2190/2022 pending on the file of JMFC I Court, Hubballi, registered for offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as ‘N.I. Act’ for brevity) insofar as the petitioner - accused No.1 is concerned. 2. The respondent has filed complaint against petitioner –accused No.1 and his son accused No.2 for offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I Act. In the said compliant it is alleged that the petitioner –accused No.1 and his son accused No.2 have jointly borrowed Rs.5,00,000/- (rupees Five Lakhs only) from the respondent. In order to repay the said loan amount, accused No.2 who is son of the petitioner -accused No.1 has issued cheque for Rs.5,00,000/- (rupees Five Lakhs only) and it has been dishonoured with endorsement “Kindly Contact Drawee Bank and Please Present again”. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6176 CRL.P No. 103844 of 2022 The respondent has issued legal notice to the petitioner – accused No.1 and his son accused No.2 intimating dishonoured of cheque and demand of repayment cheque amount. The petitioner –accused No.1 has issued reply to the said legal notice denying issuance of any cheque to the respondent. Thereafter, the respondent has filed private complaint against petitioner –accused No.1 and his son accused No.2 for offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I Act. 3. Learned Magistrate took cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and registered a case in C.C.No.2190/2022 against the petitioner –accused No.1 and his son accused No.2 and it is pending on the file of the JMFC I Court, Hubballi. The proceedings of the said case are sought to be quashed in this petition by the petitioner –accused No.1. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner – accused No.1 and learned counsel for the respondent. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6176 CRL.P No. 103844 of 2022 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner –accused No.1 would contend that the petitioner –accused No.1 is not signatory to the cheque in question which has been dishonoured. When the petitioner –accused No.1 is not signatory to the cheque in question, the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I Act is not attracted against him. With these, he prays to allow the petition and quash the proceedings against the petitioner – accused No.1. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the petitioner –accused No.1 and his son accused No.2 have jointly borrowed Rs.5,00,000/- (rupees Five Lakhs only) from the respondent –complainant. In order to repay the said loan amount, accused No.2 has issued cheque in question. He fairly admits that the petitioner –accused No.1 is not signatory to the cheque – Ex.P1 and it is not drawn on the account of the petitioner –accused No.1. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6176 CRL.P No. 103844 of 2022 7. Having heard learned counsels, this Court has perused the materials placed on record. 8. Ex.P1 –cheque has been issued by accused No.2 who is son of the petitioner –accused No.1 for making repayment of amount borrowed from the respondent even though the said amount is borrowed jointly i.e., the petitioner –accused No.1 and his son accused No.2. As cheque –Ex.P1 is issued by accused No.2 infavour of the respondent –complainant, the petitioner –accused No.1 is not liable to be prosecuted for offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I Act as the petitioner –accused No.1 has not issued the said Ex.P1 – cheque in question. Therefore, the proceedings against the petitioner –accused No.1 is requires to be quashed. 9. In the result, the following ORDER i) The petition is allowed. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6176 CRL.P No. 103844 of 2022 ii) The proceedings in C.C.No.2190/2022 pending on the file of the JMFC I Court, Hubballi are quashed so far as petitioner –accused No.1 is concerned. iii) Learned Magistrate is directed to proceed against accused No.2 and dispose of case at earliest. SD/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE PJ,DSP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31