- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7030 CRL.RP No. 100325 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. 100325 OF 2023 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS) BETWEEN: SMT. SUNITA W/O BABU ISHWAR KAMBLE AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O.LAXMI NAGAR, MACCHE, 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, TQ. 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. 150/2022 DATED 14.11.2022 IN DISMISSED THE APPEAL BY CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE PASSED IN CRIMINAL CASE NO. 16/2019 DATED 09.09.023 PASSED BY THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS -8 COURT BELAGAVI, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 138 OF NI ACT BY ALLOWING THIS REVISION PETITION AND REMAND THE MATTER TO TRIAL COURT FOR FRESH TRAIL. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7030 CRL.RP No. 100325 of 2023 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) On behalf of Sri.Santosh B. Rawoot, learned counsel for the revision petitioner, Miss.Priyanka Pawar, learned counsel submits that despite best efforts, revision petitioner is not cooperating to comply with the conditions of the interim order and requests the Court to permit her to address the arguments on merits of the matter. 2. Heard Miss.Priyanka Pawar, learned counsel and Smt.Chetana S. Biraj, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. Revision petitioner is the accused who has suffered an order of conviction in CC No.16/2019 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and ordered to pay fine of Rs.41,000/- which is ordered to be paid as compensation to the complainant with a default sentence of one and half years simple imprisonment which was confirmed in Crl.A.No.150/2022. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7030 CRL.RP No. 100325 of 2023 4. 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 accused obtained personal loan in a sum of Rs.25,000/- agreeing to repay the same and towards repayment, accused issued a cheque bearing No.316775 dated 09.11.2018 in a sum of Rs.40,631/-. Said cheque on presentation came to be dishonored with an endorsement ‘drawers signature differs’ and notice sent to the accused, returned with an endorsement ‘not claimed’. 5. 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. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7030 CRL.RP No. 100325 of 2023 6. 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. 7. Thereafter, accused filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.150/2022. 8. 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. 9. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused is before this Court, in this revision. 10. 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. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7030 CRL.RP No. 100325 of 2023 11. She would also contend that cheque is dishonored not on the ground of ‘funds insufficient’ but on the ground that ‘signature is differing’. Therefore, learned Trial Magistrate ought not to have raised the presumption in favour of the complainant under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sought for allowing the revision petition. 12. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent supports the impugned judgments. 13. Having heard the parties in detail, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 14. On such perusal of the material on record, it is crystal clear that cheque belongs to the accused. However, the with regard to the signature, there is an endorsement that signature of accused is differing. 15. To prove that signature did not belong to the accused, accused did not take any steps in referring the disputed cheque to the handwriting expert. How the said - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7030 CRL.RP No. 100325 of 2023 cheque reached the hands of the complainant is not explained by the accused. 16. Notice issued to the accused is returned with an endorsement ‘not claimed’. Before the First Appellate Court also, accused did not take any steps to refer the cheque to the handwriting expert so as to establish that signature found in the cheque is a forged signature. 17. Taking note of these aspects of the matter and also taking note of the fact that accused was due towards the personal loan obtained by the accused from the complainant; this Court is of the considered opinion that order of conviction recorded by the learned Trial Magistrate confirmed by the First Appellate Court needs no interference. 18. Accordingly, the following: ORDER i. Revision petition is meritless and hereby dismissed. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7030 CRL.RP No. 100325 of 2023 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.: 46