- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17944 CRL.RP No. 1184 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1184 OF 2022 BETWEEN: SRI SYED NOORULLA S/O LT SYED ATHAULLA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDENT OF NO. 10/1 5TH A MAIN ROAD, 5TH CROSS RAHAMATHNAGAR BENGALURU - 560 032 AND ALSO AT SYED NOORULLA C/O SYED ADNAN COCONUT INDUSTRIES NO. 103/4, HOSAHALLI, RANGAPURA ROAD TIPTUR - 572 201 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SREEDHARA H.R., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. M.S. NATARAJ SON OF SHIVASHANKARAPPA PARTNER OF MAHADEV TRADERS NO.234, 5TH MAIN ROAD, APMC YARD YESHWANTHPURA BENGALURU - 560 022 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAVEENKUMAR K.S., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 CR.PC BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17944 CRL.RP No. 1184 of 2022 HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER (PART) OF CRL.A.NO.1172/2019, DATED 18.08.2022 SIGNED ON 11.08.2022 OF THE LEARNED LXVI ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE DATED 24.04.2019 PASSED BY THE XX ADDL.SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, AND XVIII A.C.M.M., AND MACT AT BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.3662/2018 TO PAY THE FINE OF RS.5,00,000/- IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF FINE HE SHALL UNDERGO S.I FOR TWO MONTHS VIDE ANNEXURE-B SET ASIDE BY THE ORDERS OF THE COURTS BELOW BY ALLOWING THIS CRL.RP. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER 1. Heard Sri.Sreedhara H. R., learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri.Praveenkumar K. S., learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Accused who has suffered an order of conviction in CC No.3662/2018 dated 24.04.2019 which was modified by the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.1172/2019 dated 18.08.2022 is the revision petitioner. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17944 CRL.RP No. 1184 of 2022 3. Facts which are utmost necessary for disposal of the revision petition are as under: 3.1. In respect of the dishonoured cheque issued by the accused, a private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. came to be filed alleging the commission of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before the jurisdictional Magistrate. 3.2. After due trial, accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced as under: “The accused is found guilty for the offences punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and hence, he is convicted under Section 255(2) of Criminal Procedure Code. The accused is hereby sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six month and also liable to pay fine of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) for the above said offence, in default of payment of fine amount, the accused shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of another two months. Further, it is also held that, out of the fine deposited by the accused, the accused is also liable to pay the compensation amount of Rs.4,90,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Ninety - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17944 CRL.RP No. 1184 of 2022 Thousand only) to the complainant within three months from the date of this order and the remaining fine amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) is to be confiscated to the state. The bail bond of the accused and surety stands cancelled.” 4. Accused filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.1172/2019 challenging the validity of the order of the learned Trial Magistrate. 5. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court after securing the records, heard the arguments of the parties in detail and allowed the appeal in part and modified the sentenced as under: “Appeal filed by the appellant/accused M.S.Nataraj the partner of Mahadev Traders under Section 374(3) CrPC is allowed in part. The conviction of appellant/accused in CC.No.3362/2018 dated 24.4.2019 passed by the XVIII ACMM, (SCCH-22) convicting the accused for the offence under Section 138 of NI Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5,00,000/-, in default of payment of fine he shall undergo SI for two months and out of fine amount Rs.4,90,000/- is ordered to be paid as fine to the complainant and remaining Rs.10,000/- is ordered to be confiscated to the State is confirmed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17944 CRL.RP No. 1184 of 2022 The sentence of imprisonment for six months passed by the trial court is set aside.” 6. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused is before this Court, in this revision petition. 7. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the revision petition would contend that accused is running a coconut industry and buys the coconut from in and around places and sells it in different place. In that regard, there was a transaction between the accused and complainant and for the sake of security, cheque leaf are drawn on HDFC Bank was given by the accused which was in blank and same has been misused by the complainant by concocting a story that accused has borrowed sum of Rs.5,00,000/- and towards repayment, said cheque came to be issued which has not been properly appreciated by both the Courts resulting in miscarriage of justice and sought for allowing the revision petition. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent supports the impugned judgments. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17944 CRL.RP No. 1184 of 2022 9. Having heard the arguments of both the parties, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 10. On such perusal of the material on record, there is no dispute that cheque in question is belonging to the accused and signature found therein is that of the accused. 11. According to the accused, same is given as security and same has been misused by the accused. 12. If it is so, when the reply notice (Ex.P.9) came to be issued, accused had the benefit of service of an Advocate and some positive action ought to have been taken by the accused against the complainant for the alleged misuse. Pertinently, no such action is taken by the accused which exposes the hollowness in the defence made by the accused. 13. Further, according to the accused, the cheque leaf is an isolated cheque leaf from the HDFC Bank and to establish the same, he has produced the cheque book containing blank cheques of the accused maintained in HDFC Bank. 14. In his cross-examination, she has admitted that cheque leaf issued by the accused would be filled by writer or - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17944 CRL.RP No. 1184 of 2022 her children. Therefore, the conviction urged on behalf of the accused that the cheque has been misused cannot be countenanced in law. 15. Further, in respect of the cheque, in the counter foil, there is no mention. Specific question was put to the accused in this regard in the cross-examination and the accused has given an evasive answer that the writing of the particular serial number of the cheque which is marked at Ex.P.2 is left over due to inadvertence. 16. Such a defence cannot be taken into consideration as rebuttal evidence to rebut the strong statutory presumption available to the complainant under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 17. Therefore, conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is just and proper. 18. Insofar as sentence is concerned, learned Judge in the First Appellate Court has already modified the sentence and - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17944 CRL.RP No. 1184 of 2022 therefore, there is no scope for this Court, in the revisional jurisdiction to further modify the sentence. 19. Accordingly, the following: ORDER i. Revision petition is meritless and hereby dismissed. ii. Amount in deposit is ordered to be withdrawn by the complainant under due identification. iii. Balance amount to be paid on or before 30.04.2026 failing which revision petitioner shall under imprisonment as ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38