- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22468 CRL.RP No. 1520 of 2022 C/W CRL.RP No. 1529 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1520 OF 2022 C/W CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1529 OF 2022 IN CRL.RP No. 1520/2022: BETWEEN: 1. M/S PRUTHVI BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS NO. 29/2, DR. LAKSHMI COMPLEX 2ND FLOOR, HULIMAVU GATE BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 076 REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER MR. P. SHANKAR 2. MR. P. SHANAKR AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS SON OF LATE PILLAPPA NO.37, 2ND CROSS, JAMBU SAVARI DINNE SOS POST, J.P NAGAR 8TH PHASE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 076. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. A V RAMAKRISHNA., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22468 CRL.RP No. 1520 of 2022 C/W CRL.RP No. 1529 of 2022 AND: SRI S T RANKA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS SON OF LATE B.S.RANKA NO. 22, SHEETHAL VILLA 1A MAIN , S.T.BED LAYOUT 4TH BLOCK, NEW EXTENSION PROPRIETOR OF M/S OMKAR INVESTMENT AND FINANCE, NO.9, ROOPA COMPLEX SHIVA GANGA MUTT ROAD, 3RD MAIN ROAD, CHAMARAJPET BENGALURU - 560 018. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HARISH.R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI N.MAHENDRANATH, ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 CR.PC BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.10.2022 PASSED BY LXIX ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU IN CRL.A.NO.969/2018 AND JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED 26.04.2018 PASSED BY THE XLII ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.8914/2017 BY ALLOWING THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION AND ACQUIT THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED PERSONS FROM THE CONVICTED OFFENCES P/U/S 138 OF THE N.I ACT., ETC., - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22468 CRL.RP No. 1520 of 2022 C/W CRL.RP No. 1529 of 2022 IN CRL.RP NO. 1529/2022: BETWEEN: 1. M/S PRUTHIVI BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS NO. 29/2, DR. LAKSHMI COMPLEX 2ND FLOOR, HULIMAVU GATE BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 076 REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER MR. P. SHANKAR 2. MR. P. SHANAKR AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS SON OF LATE PILLAPPA NO.37, 2ND CROSS, JAMBU SAVARI DINNE SOS POST, J.P NAGAR 8TH PHASE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGLAURU - 560 076. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. A V RAMAKRISHNA., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI S T RANKA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS SON OF LATE B.S. RANKA NO. 22, SHEETHAL VILLA 1A MAIN , S.T. BED LAYOUT 4TH BLOCK, NEW EXTENISION PROPRIEOTR OF M/S OMKAR INVESTMENT AND FINANCE, NO.9, ROOPA COMPLEX SHIVA GANGA MUTT ROAD, 3RD MAIN ROAD, CHAMARAJPET BENGALURU 560 018. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HARISH.R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI N.MAHENDRANATH, ADVOCATE) - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22468 CRL.RP No. 1520 of 2022 C/W CRL.RP No. 1529 of 2022 THIS CRL.RP FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.10.2022 PASSED BY THE LXIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU IN CRL.A.NO.970/2018 AND JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED 26.04.2018 PASSED BY THE XLII ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.5926/2017 BY ALLOWING THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION AND ACQUIT THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED PERSONS FROM THE CONVICTED OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT., ETC., THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri,A.V.Ramakrishna, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and Sri.Harish, learned counsel appearing for the respondents in both the revision petitions. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22468 CRL.RP No. 1520 of 2022 C/W CRL.RP No. 1529 of 2022 2. The revision petitioner is an accused who suffered an order of conviction in C.C.No.8914 of 2017 and C.C.No.5926 of 2017 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to pay a sum of Rs.33,00,000/- as fine amount in both the matters, which has been confirmed in Crl.A. No.969 of 2018 and 970 of 2018 by the First Appellate Court. 3. Facts in nut-shell, which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present revision petitions are as under:
A private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., came to be filed on the file of XLII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City, which was registered in C.C.No.8914 of 2017 and C.C.5926 of 2017 in respect of dishonored cheques issued by the accused to the complainant. It was a business transaction between the complainant and accused and towards the outstanding amount, cheques in - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22468 CRL.RP No. 1520 of 2022 C/W CRL.RP No. 1529 of 2022 question came to be issued. Admittedly, cheques were dishonored and legal notice was issued.
There was no compliance to the callings of legal notice, which resulted in seeking action against the accused by the complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act. 4. The learned Trial Magistrate, after completing the necessary formalities, summoned the accused and recorded the plea in both the cases. Since the accused pleaded 'not guilty', therefore, trial was held. 5. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the Special Power of Attorney Holder, namely, Sri.V.Radhakrishnan got examined himself as PW-1 and placed on record eleven documentary evidence, which were exhibited and marked as Exs.P1 to P11, including the dishonored cheques, Bank endorsement and copy of the legal notice. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22468 CRL.RP No. 1520 of 2022 C/W CRL.RP No. 1529 of 2022 6. As against the material evidence placed on record by the complainant, accused got examined himself as DW-1 and placed on record, documents, namely, Account extracts, which were exhibited and marked as Exs.D1 and D2. 7. In the cross-examination of accused, he categorically admits that he is due to pay the amount mentioned in the cheques. That was sufficient enough to conclude the proceedings by the Trial Magistrate inasmuch as admission does not require further proof. 8. Accordingly, all ingredients stood established before the Trial Magistrate for recording an order of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act. 9. The order of conviction was subject matter of the appeal before the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.969 of 2018 and 970 of 2018 in respect of the aforesaid cases. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22468 CRL.RP No. 1520 of 2022 C/W CRL.RP No. 1529 of 2022 10. The learned Judge in the First Appellate Court, after securing the records, heard the arguments of the parties in detail and by considered common judgment dated 28.10.2022 dismissed the appeal of the accused. 11. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused is before this Court in these revision petitions. 12. Learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner in both the revision petitions reiterating the grounds urged in the revision petitions, would vehemently contend that both the Courts have not properly taken into consideration the probative value of Exs.D1 and D2, which are the account extracts, wherein, there is a repayment of the amount and therefore, there was no liability under the dishonored cheques, marked at Ex.D1 in both the cases and sought for allowing of the revision petition. 13. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent supports the impugned judgment in both the cases. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22468 CRL.RP No. 1520 of 2022 C/W CRL.RP No. 1529 of 2022 14. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. On such perusal of the material on record, issuance of the cheques and signature of the accused found therein is not in dispute. Even though accused is said to have repaid the amount as per Exs.D1 and D2, in his examination-in-chief, he categorically admits in cross-examination that he was due to pay the amount mentioned in the cheques to the complainant. 15. Such an admission would be sufficient enough to record an order of conviction as it proves that the cheques were issued towards the legally recoverable debt. 16. Therefore, order conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act recorded by the Trial Magistrate, confirmed by the First Appellate Court needs no interference, that too, under the limited powers of revisional jurisdiction. 17. Accordingly, the following: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22468 CRL.RP No. 1520 of 2022 C/W CRL.RP No. 1529 of 2022 ORDER Both the Revision Petitions are dismissed. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE DH List No.: 2 Sl No.: 38