- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21929 CRL.P No. 7231 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7231 OF 2022 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI. VENKATESHWARA TEXTILES REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI. MANJUNATH G. S/O GURRAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT NO.101, 'B' BLOCK, 1ST FLOOR JANAPRIYA FIRST AVENUE APARTMENT BINNAMANGALA, NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562123. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. KISHAN DUTT, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. CHANDRAKALA K.B. W/O KUSHAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT NO.302, 'A' 7TH BLOCK, 3RD FLOOR, JANAPRIYA FIRST AVENUE APARTMENT BINNAMANGALA, NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562123. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. KRISHNA MURTHY M.R., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED IN C.C.NO.133/2020 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE PRINCIPAL JUDGE AND JMFC AT NELAMANGALA Digitally signed by HEMALATHA J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21929 CRL.P No. 7231 of 2022 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF NI ACT AS PER ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has challenged the prosecution launched against it by the respondent in C.C. No.133/2020 pending on the file of Principal Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala, Bengaluru Rural district for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act , 1881 (henceforth referred to as 'N.I.Act' for short). 2. The respondent filed PCR No.401/2019 alleging the commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The trial Court after recording the sworn statement, took cognizance of the said offence and issued process. 3. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the cheque in question was invalid, as, on the date it was - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21929 CRL.P No. 7231 of 2022 allegedly drawn, the State Bank of Hyderabad had merged with State Bank of India. Therefore, he submits that the cheque was not issued towards discharge of any legally enforceable debt and therefore the cheque was dishonored. He further submits that in case of an invalid cheque, the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is not attracted and hence, he submits that the Trial Court without considering this aspect, proceeded to take cognizance. 5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that the cheque in question was dishonored not due to the fact that it was an invalid cheque but on account of insufficient funds in the account of the petitioner. He therefore submits that an offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act was made out and hence the contention urged by the petitioner is not worthy of consideration. 6. A perusal of the bank endorsement shows that the cheque in question was dishonored due to 'insufficient funds' in the account of the petitioner and not on the ground that the cheque was invalid. Therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner does not merit acceptance. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:21929 CRL.P No. 7231 of 2022 7. Consequently the petition is dismissed. 8. In view of dismissal of main petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and the same stand disposed of. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE HJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28