- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 464 OF 2019 C/W CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 463 OF 2019, CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 465 OF 2019, CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 466 OF 2019 IN CRL.RP No. 464/2019: BETWEEN: SRI SUMIT TANDON S/O PN TANDON AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDING AT C-25 MAHENDRU ENCLAVE DELHI - 110 033. …PETITIONER (BY SRI THARANATH SHETTY K, ADV.) AND: SRI KRISHNA FABRICS NO.1, I FLOOR 15TH A CROSS 4TH MAIN, S.R. NAGAR BANGALORE - 560 027 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETRIX SMT UMA MAHESHWARI. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI MALLANAGOUD (NOC), ADV.) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION DATED 24.02.2016, PASSED IN C.C.NO.17203/2012, ON THE FILE OF THE 27TH A.C.M.M., AT BANGALORE AND CONFIRMED BY THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 27.02.2019 PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.362/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE 55TH ADDITIONAL CITY Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE CITY, BY ALLOWING THIS CRL.RP. IN CRL.RP NO. 463/2019: BETWEEN: SRI SUMIT TANDON S/O P.N. TANDON AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDING AT C-25 MAHENDRU ENCLAVE DELHI - 110 033. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI THARANATH SHETTY K, ADV.) AND: SRI KRISHNA FABRICS NO.1, I FLOOR, 15TH "A" CROSS, 4TH MAIN, S.R. NAGAR BANGALORE-560 027 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETRIX SMT. UMA MAHESHWARI. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI MALLANAGOUD (NOC), ADV.) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S. CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT DATED 27.02.2019 PASSED BY THE LV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU IN CRL.A.NO.361/2016 AND THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.02.2016 PASSED BY THE XXVII ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.17202/2012, BY ALLOWING THIS CRL.RP.I.A.NO.1/2019 FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE.I.A.NO.1/2019 FILED BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO SUSPEND THE ORDER DATED 27.02.2019 PASSED BY THE LV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU IN CRL.A.NO.361/2016 AND THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.02.2016 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER PASSED BY THE XXVII ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.17202/2012, PENDING DISPOSAL OF THIS CRL.RP. IN CRL.RP NO. 465/2019: BETWEEN: SRI SUMIT TANDON S/O P.N. TANDON AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDING AT C-25 MAHENDRU ENCLAVE DELHI - 110 033. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI THARANATH SHETTY K, ADV.) AND: SRI KRISHNA FABRICS NO.1, I FLOOR, 15TH A CROSS 4TH MAIN, S R NAGAR BANGALORE - 560 027 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETRIX SMT UMA MAHESHWARI. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI MALLANAGOUD (NOC), ADV.) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 27.02.2019 PASSED IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.363/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE 55th ADDITIONAL CITY CIIVL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU CITY AND THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 24.02.2016 PASSED IN C.C.NO.17204/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE 27th ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU, BY ALLOWING THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION. IN CRL.RP NO. 466/2019: BETWEEN: SRI SUMIT TANDON S/O P.N. TANDON R/AT C-25, MAHENDRU ENCLAVE - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER DELHI - 110 033. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI THARANATH SHETTY K, ADV.) AND: SRI KRISHNA FABRICS NO.1, I FLOOR, 15TH A CROSS 4TH MAIN, S.R.NAGAR BANGALORE - 560 027 REP BY ITS PROPRIETRIX SMT. UMA MAHESHWARI. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI MALLANAGOUD (NOC), ADV.) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 27.02.2019 PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.364/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE 55th ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE AND THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 24.02.2016 PASSED IN C.C.NO.17205/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE 27th A.C.M.M., BANGALORE BY ALLOWING THIS CRL.RP. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL COMMON ORDER 1. The above-captioned four criminal revision petitions arise between the same parties and from the same transaction and therefore, they are heard together with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and are disposed of by this common order. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER 3. Respondent herein had initiated four separate proceedings against Company known as "Fortune Graphics Ltd," and the petitioner herein, who is the Director of the aforesaid Company for offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'N.I. Act') before the jurisdictional Court of Magistrate at Bangalore in C.CNo.17202 of 2012, 17203 of 2012, 17204 of 2012 and 17205 of 2012. It is the case of the respondent complainant that in the month of July 2011, petitioner herein had approached the respondent, representing himself to be the Director of the accused no.1 Company and had placed orders for purchase of silk fabric. Accordingly, complainant had supplied goods worth ₹.58,01,162.25 paisa to the accused and on receipt of the goods, an amount of ₹.15,50,455.25 paisa was paid and towards balance amount of ₹.42,50,707/-, accused had issued the cheques in question, which are subject matter of proceedings in C.C.No.17202 of 2012, 17203 of 2012, 17204 of 2012 and 17205 of 2012 and the said cheques when presented for realisation were dishonoured by the drawee bank with a shara "insufficient funds" in the bank account of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER the accused. The legal notice that was got issued on behalf of the respondent to the accused thereafter was served and since accused had failed to repay the amount covered under the cheques in question, in spite of service of legal notice, proceedings were initiated against accused nos.1 and 2 by the respondent in the aforesaid four cases for offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. 4. In the said proceedings, by a common judgment and order, the accused were convicted for offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced to pay ₹.40,00,000/-, ₹.9,40,000/-, ₹.20,00,000/- and ₹.12,00,000/- in C.C.No.17202 of 2012, CC No. 17203 of 2012, 17204 of 2012 and 17205 of 2012 respectively with interest at 9% per annum from the date of cheque till payment of the entire amount. The said judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court in the aforesaid four cases was confirmed by the Appellate Court by separate judgment and order dated 27.02.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal No.361 of 2016, 362 of 2016, 363 of 2016 and 364 of 2016. Assailing the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed in - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER the aforesaid four cases, accused no. 2 is before this Court in these four revision petitions. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing the matter for sometime submits that, as against accused no.1 Company, liquidation proceedings has been initiated by the respondent company herein which is pending consideration before the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, Special Bench in Company Petition No. (IB) 245 (PB) / 2018. He submits that, petitioner, who is accused no.2 is one of the Director of the accused no.1 Company and is ready and willing to pay the cheque amount to the respondent Company, if some reasonable time is granted. He submits that, 50% of the cheque amount, which is deposited by the petitioner has been already withdrawn by the respondent Company. He has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SANJABIJ TARI V KISHORE S. BORCAR & ANR - 2025 INSC 1158 and submits that for payment of the balance cheque amount with applicable interest as stated in the case of SANJABIJ TARI (supra), five monthly instalments may be granted. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent has argued in support of the impugned judgment and order and submits that, as on the date the impugned judgment and orders were passed, the judgment in the case of SANJABIJ TARI (supra), was not in existence and therefore, the principle laid down in the said judgment cannot be made applicable to the case on hand. He submits that, proceedings were initiated against the accused in the present case in the year 2012 and till date only 50% of the cheque amount has been received by the respondent. The transaction has been proved by the respondent by producing necessary oral and documentary evidence before the Trial Court and the accused have not disputed the transaction or the issuance of the cheques in question. He also submits that ratio decidendi laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SANJABIJ TARI (supra) cannot be made applicable to facts and circumstances of the present case. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petitions. 7. It is not in dispute that the signature found in the cheques in question is of the petitioner herein and it is also not in dispute that the cheques were drawn on the account of - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER accused no.1 Company maintained by it in Kotak Mahindra Bank, Axis Bank Ltd and Punjab National Bank Ltd. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of DAMODAR S. PRABHU V SAYED BABALAL H - (2010) 5 SCC 663 had framed certain guidelines for compounding of the offences under the Negotiable Instruments Act. In the case of SANJABIJ TARI (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has revisited the guidelines laid down by it earlier in the case of DAMODAR S PRABHU (supra) and in paragraph nos.37, 38 and 39 it is observed as follows. "37. It is pertinent to mention that this Court framed guidelines for compounding offences under the NI Act nearly fifteen years back in Damodar S.Prabhu (supra). The relevant portion of the said Judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:- “THE GUIDELINES (i) In the circumstances, it is proposed as follows: (a) That directions can be given that the writ of summons be suitably modified making it clear to the accused that he could make an application for compounding of the offences at the first or second hearing of the case and that if such an application is made, compounding may be allowed by the court without imposing any costs on the accused. (b) If the accused does not make an application for compounding as aforesaid, then if an application for - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER compounding is made before the Magistrate at a subsequent stage, compounding can be allowed subject to the condition that the accused will be required to pay 10% of the cheque amount to be deposited as a condition for compounding with the Legal Services Authority, or such authority as the court deems fit. (c) Similarly, if the application for compounding is made before the Sessions Court or a High Court in revision or appeal, such compounding may be allowed on the condition that the accused pays 15% of the cheque amount by way of costs. (d) Finally, if the application for compounding is made before the Supreme Court, the figure would increase to 20% of the cheque amount. xxx xxx xxx 24. We are also conscious of the view that the judicial endorsement of the abovequoted Guidelines could be seen as an act of judicial law-making and therefore an intrusion into the legislative domain. It must be kept in mind that Section 147 of the Act does not carry any guidance on how to proceed with the compounding of offences under the Act. We have already explained that the scheme contemplated under Section 320 CrPC Criminal Appeal No.1755/2010 Page 18 of 19 cannot be followed in the strict sense. In view of the legislative vacuum, we see no hurdle to the endorsement of some suggestions which have been designed to discourage litigants from unduly delaying - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER the composition of the offence in cases involving Section 138 of the Act. 25. The graded scheme for imposing costs is a means to encourage compounding at an early stage of litigation. In the status quo, valuable time of the court is spent on the trial of these cases and the parties are not liable to pay any court fee since the proceedings are governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure even though the impact of the offence is largely confined to the private parties. Even though the imposition of costs by the competent court is a matter of discretion, the scale of costs has been suggested in the interest of uniformity. The competent court can of course reduce the costs with regard to the specific facts and circumstances of a case, while recording reasons in writing for such variance. Bona fide litigants should of course contest the proceedings to their logical end. 26. Even in the past, this Court has used its power to do complete justice under Article 142 of the Constitution to frame guidelines in relation to the subject-matter where there was a legislative vacuum.” 38. Since a very large number of cheque bouncing cases are still pending and interest rates have fallen in the last few years, this Court is of the view that it is time to ‘revisit and tweak the guidelines’. Accordingly, the aforesaid guidelines of compounding are modified as under:- (a) If the accused pays the cheque amount before recording of his evidence (namely defence evidence), then the Trial Court may allow compounding of the offence without imposing any cost or penalty on the accused. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER (b) If the accused makes the payment of the cheque amount post the recording of his evidence but prior to the pronouncement of judgment by the Trial Court, the Magistrate may allow compounding of the offence on payment of additional 5% of the cheque amount with the Legal Services Authority or such other Authority as the Court deems fit. (c) Similarly, if the payment of cheque amount is made before the Sessions Court or a High Court in Revision or Appeal, such Court may compound the offence on the condition that the accused pays 7.5% of the cheque amount by way of costs. (d) Finally, if the cheque amount is tendered before this Court, the figure would increase to 10% of the cheque amount. 39. This Court is of the view that if the Accused is willing to pay in accordance with the aforesaid guidelines, the Court may suggest to the parties to go for compounding. If for any reason, the financial institutions/complainant asks for payment other than the cheque amount or settlement of entire loan or other outstanding dues, then the Magistrate may suggest to the Accused to plead guilty and exercise the power under Section 255(2) and/or 255(3) of the Cr.P.C. or 278 of the BNSS, 2023 and/or give the benefit under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to the Accused." 8. The petitioner, who is accused no.2 in the present case has submitted that he is ready and willing to compound the offence as provided in Clause (e) of paragraph no.38 in the - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER case of SANJABIJ TARI (supra),. However, learned counsel for the respondent submits that, he is not agreeable for the settlement proposed by the petitioner. 9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SANJABIJ TARI (supra), has observed that, if for any reason the complainant asks for payment other than the cheque amount or settlement of entire amount or other outstanding dues, then the Courts are at liberty to suggest to the accused to plead guilty and exercise the powers under Section 255(2) and/or 255(3) of Cr.P.C, or 278 of the BNSS, 2023 and/or give the benefit under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. 10. The cheque amount with cost at 7.5% of the cheque amount totally amounts to Rs.43,73,250/-, petitioner has already deposited 50% of the cheque amount and undisputedly the respondent has withdrawn the same. Under the circumstances, if the petitioner is directed to deposit the balance of the cheque amount and also pay costs at the rate of 7.5% of the cheque amount as provided in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SANJABIJ TARI (supra), the same would serve the ends of justice. - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9337 CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019 C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019 CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER 11. Accordingly, the following:- ORDER i. Criminal Revision Petitions are partly allowed. ii. The impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by the Courts below in all the four cases are confirmed and the order of sentence passed in the said cases is modified and the petitioner is directed to pay a total sum of Rs.43,73,250/- to the respondent inclusive of the amount already deposited. iii. The balance amount shall be paid by the petitioner to the respondent in five equated monthly instalments commencing from 01.03.2026. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE NMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53