- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:284 CRL.P No. 102874 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102874 OF 2025 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. M/S AISHWARYAGIRI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD., NO.236, 2ND STAGE, 2ND MAIN, 5TH CROSS, KHB COLONY, BASAVESHWARANAGAR BENGALURU-560079. REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SRI G JAYARAMAIAH. 2. SRI G. JAYARAMAIAH S/O GIRIYAPPA @ JAYARAM AGE. 57 YEARS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, AISHWARYAGIRI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD., NO.236, 2ND TAGE, 2ND MAIN, 5TH ROSS, KHB COLONY, BASAVESHWARANAGAR, BENGALURU-560079 NOTE. AS PER PCR COPY ADDRESS NO.147, 4TH CROSS ROAD, JYOTHINAGAR, CHANDRA LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560040. &PETITIONERS (BY SRI. TANVEER AHMED SHARIFF, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. SANJEEV KUMAR CHANNABASAPPA TULJANNAVAR AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, MANAVALLI AVADATTI TALUK, BELAGAVI DISTRICT-591317. &RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. R/W. U/S. 528 OF BNSS, 2023, PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO. 3400/2023 PENDING BEFORE THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SAVADATTI FOR THE OFFENCE U/SEC. 138 OF NI ACT AND CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN CC NO. 3400/2023 PENDING BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SAVADATTI FOR THE OFFENCE U/SEC. 138 OF NI ACT. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:284 CRL.P No. 102874 of 2025 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Sri Tanveer Ahmed Shariff, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 are the petitioners challenging the taking of cognizance and the issuance of summons in respect of a complaint filed under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short, 8the Cr.P.C.9), alleging the commission of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, 8the N.I.Act9). 3. The contention of the petitioners is that there is no specific allegation in the complaint that accused No.2, being the managing director of accused No. 1-company, was in charge of the affairs of the company. 4. However, such a contention cannot serve as a ground for quashing the order taking cognizance. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:284 CRL.P No. 102874 of 2025 5. At most, it may constitute a defence available to the accused during the trial, following the dictum of the Hon9ble Apex Court in the case Indian Bank of Association and Others vs. Union of India and Others reported in (2014) 5 SCC 590 and in view of the language employed in Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, this Court is of the considered opinion that the grounds urged in the petition are hardly sufficient to quash the order taking cognizance and quash the pending proceedings. 6. accordingly, following: ORDER i. Petition is dismissed. ii. All available contentions are kept open to be urged in the trial. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE AC,KAV, CT:CMU LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 67