- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4968 CRL.RP No. 360 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.360 OF 2020 (397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: ANAND S/O. AWANEPPA BADIGER, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC. K.E.B. EMPLOYEE, O AND M DIVISION, BESCOM, HARIHAR. …PETITIONER (BY SRI R.H.ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND: SHANMUKHAPPA S/O. KRISHNAPPA DOMBAR, AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED EMPLOYEE, R/O. RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR, RANEBENNUR, DIST. HAVERI. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI S.C.HARTI, ADVOCATE, SRI. P.V.KULKARNI, ADVOCATE AND SRI ABHISHEK L. KALLED, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/S. 397 R/W. 401 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ALLOW THE REVISION PETITION AND CALL FOR RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.58/2019 DATED 29.02.2020, II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HAVERI (SITTING AT RANEBENNUR) CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT IN CC NO.163/2017, DATED 21.08.2019 BY II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, RANEBENNUR AND CONSEQUENTLY ACQUIT THE ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S. 138 OF N.I. ACT. V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Date: 2025.03.27 10:53:22 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4968 CRL.RP No. 360 of 2020 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. Sri.R.H.Angadi, learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that despite best efforts, he could not get the instructions from the revision petitioner to proceed with the case. 2. Learned counsel for respondent Sri.Abhishek L. Kalled, present through video conference submits that the interim order granted by this court is also not complied. Accordingly, the matter is heard on merits. 3. Accused who suffered an order of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 138 of negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (for short, ‘the N.I.Act’), confirmed in Crl.A.No.58/2019 is revision petitioner. 4. Admittedly, the accused has not placed any proper material on record to rebut the presumption as he - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4968 CRL.RP No. 360 of 2020 failed to examine himself as a witness. Further, no documentary evidence is also placed on record. 5. In the cross examination of PW.1, there is no positive material elicited so as to hold that accused has rebutted the presumption by following the principles of law enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rohitbhai Jivanlal Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and another1. 6. Taking note of the same, conviction order passed by trial magistrate and confirmed by the first appellate court needs no interference in this revision petition, except for the fact that the fine amount of Rs.10,000/- is ordered by the trial magistrate and confirmed by the first appellate court needs to be set aside as lis is Privy to the parties and no state machinery involved. Accordingly, the following order is passed. 1 (2019) 18 SCC 106 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4968 CRL.RP No. 360 of 2020 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 the N.I.Act, fine amount of Rs.4,60,000/- is reduced to sum of Rs.4,50,000/- balance of the fine amount is to be paid by the accused on or before 15.04.2025 failing which he shall undergo imprisonment as ordered by the trial court. iii. Entire fine amount of Rs.4,50,000/- is order to be paid as compensation to the complainant. iv. After the payment of entire compensation amount, fine amount of Rs.10,000/- ordered by trial magistrate confirmed by the first appellate court towards defraying expenses of the State stands set aside and accused is entitled for refund of the same. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4968 CRL.RP No. 360 of 2020 v. 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.: 63