- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7029 CRL.RP No. 100326 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100326 OF 2023 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS) BETWEEN: SHRI BABU S/O ISHWAR KAMBLE AGE. 62 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. LAXMI NAGAR, MACHHE, BELAGAVI, TQ. & DIST. BELAGAVI-590014. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. PRIYANKA PAWAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SANTOSH. B. RAWOOT, ADVOCATE) AND: SHREE BASAVESHWAR URBAN CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI NIYAMIT, UDYAMBAG BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, SHRI BASAYYA BABAYYA MATHAPATI, AGE. 47 YEARS, OCC. SERVICE, R/O. HEBBAL, DIST. HUKKERI-591221. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. CHETANA S. BIRAJ, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE IV ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI, IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 151/2022 DATED 14.11.2022 IN DISMISSED THE APPEAL BY CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE PASSED IN CRIMINAL CASE NO. 727/2018 DATED 01.07.2019 PASSED BY THE VIII JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS COURT, BELAGAVI, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/SEC. 138 OF NI ACT BY ALLOWING THIS REVISION PETITION. AND REMAND THE MATTER TO TRIAL COURT FOR FRESH TRAIL. Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7029 CRL.RP No. 100326 of 2023 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Miss.Priyanka Pawar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri.Santosh B. Rawoot, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Smt.Chetana S. Biraj, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Revision petitioner is the accused who has suffered an order of conviction in CC No.727/2018 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and ordered to pay fine of Rs.1,95,500/- which is ordered to be paid as compensation to the complainant with a default sentence of one year simple imprisonment which was confirmed in Crl.A.No.151/2022. 3. Facts in brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the revision petition are as under: A complaint came to be lodged under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. contending that complainant is a registered society under the Karnataka Co-operating Societies Act and - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7029 CRL.RP No. 100326 of 2023 accused obtained personal loan in a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- agreeing to repay the same and towards repayment, accused issued a cheque bearing No.000003 dated 31.05.2018 in a sum of Rs.1,67,116/-. Said cheque on presentation came to be dishonored with an endorsement ‘funds insufficient’. Thereafter, legal notice was sent to the accused. There was no compliance to the callings of the notice. Therefore, sought for action against the accused. 4. After due trial, accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act following the dictum of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rangappa v. Sri.Mohan reported in AIR 2010 SC 1898. 5. Accused though examined himself as D.W.1, did not rebut the presumption available to the complainant under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 6. Thereafter, accused filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.151/2022. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7029 CRL.RP No. 100326 of 2023 7. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court took into consideration all these aspects of the matter and rightly dismissed the appeal by considered judgment dated 14.11.2022. 8. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused is before this Court, in this revision. 9. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the revision petition contended that both the Courts have not considered the probative value of the oral evidence of the accused resulting in miscarriage of justice and sought for allowing the revision petition. 10. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent supports the impugned judgments. 11. Having heard the parties in detail, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7029 CRL.RP No. 100326 of 2023 12. On such perusal of the material on record, it is seen that cheque belongs to the accused and signature found therein is that of the accused. 13. Admittedly, cheque came to be dishonored with an endorsement ‘funds insufficient’ and there was no compliance to the callings of the legal notice despite due service of the notice. 14. The defence taken by the accused was not sufficient to rebut the presumption inasmuch as accused failed to afford any plausible explanation nor took any positive action for the alleged misuse of the cheque. 15. Accordingly, order of conviction recorded by the learned Trial Magistrate confirmed by the First Appellate Court needs no interference. 16. As against the cheque amount of Rs.1,67,116/-, learned Trial Magistrate has imposed sum of Rs.1,95,500/. It is also taken note of by the learned Trial Magistrate while convicting the accused that accused pleaded for - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7029 CRL.RP No. 100326 of 2023 installments and therefore, there is no dispute as to the liability covered under the dishonored cheque. 17. Hence, order of conviction and sentence needs no interference. 18. Accordingly, following: ORDER i. Revision petition is meritless and hereby dismissed. ii. Time is extended to pay the fine amount till 31.05.2025 failing which accused shall undergo imprisonment as ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate confirmed by the First Appellate Court. SD/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV CT:GSM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 47