- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1051 CRL.RP No. 100095 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.100095 OF 2021 (397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: MR. SUBASH KUMAR SARANGI S/O HUCCHAPPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. GANGAVATHI 583227, DIST. KOPPAL. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NEELENDRA D. GUNDE, ADVOCATE) AND: VEERAMAHESWARA PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMITA, GANGAVATHI THROUGH ITS MANAGER, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, MALLIKARJUNA S/O. MAHADEV, AGE. 33 EYARS, OCC. MANAGER OF VPSSN, R/O. GANGAVATHI 583227, DIST. KOPPAL. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. J.S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO CALL FOR THE RELEVANT RECORDS AND TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24.02.2021 PASSED IN CRL.APPEAL NO.5/2017 BY THE I ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE-KOPPAL SITTING AT GANGAVATHI THEREBY CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED IN C.C.NO 972/2015 DATED 11/01/2017 THEREBY CONVICTING THE PETITIONER FOR OFFENNCE PUNISHABLE U/S 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT AND DIRECTING THE PETITIONER TO PAY A FINE OF RS.13,00,000 WITH DEFAULT CLASUE FOR 6 MONTHS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1051 CRL.RP No. 100095 of 2021 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri Neelendra D. Gunde, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri N.M.Patil, advocate for Sri J.S.Shetty, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Accused in C.C.No.972/2015 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Gangavathi, is the revision petitioner who has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, confirmed in Crl.A.No.5/2017 on the file of the I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Koppal, sitting at Gangavathi. 3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present revision petition are as under: A private complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure came to be filed by the respondent/Bank alleging commission of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, by contending that Smt. Guramma, W/o Huchappa Sarangi borrowed Rs.3,50,000/- as loan. So also, her husband Sri Huchappa Basanna Sarangi - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1051 CRL.RP No. 100095 of 2021 borrowed loan of Rs.4,00,000/-. Revision Petitioner/accused stood as co-obligant for both the loans. 4. Admittedly, loan account becomes irregular and towards repayment of the loan amount, accused issued a cheque in a sum of Rs.12,30,211/- (i.e., Rs.5,68,895/- outstanding in the name of Guramma and Rs.6,61,313/- outstanding in the name of Huchappa Sarangi, totaling to Rs.12,30,211/- as on 22.06.2014). 5. The cheque on presentation came to be dishonored with an endorsement ‘funds insufficient’. Callings of the statutory notice was not complied with. 6. Therefore, learned Trial Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and after following the principles of law enunciated in the case of Indian Bank Association and others vs. Union of India and others reported in (2014)5 SCC 590 recorded the statement of the complainant and relied on the documentary evidence placed on record on behalf of the complainant viz., authorization letter (notary), registration copy (notary), dishonored cheque, bank endorsement, legal notice, postal - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1051 CRL.RP No. 100095 of 2021 receipt, postal acknowledgement, agreement letters, loan account extracts and convicted the accused and sentenced as under: “Acting u/Sec.255(2) of Cr.P.C. the accused is hereby convicted for the offence punishable u/S 138 of N.I.Act and sentenced him as under: The accused is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.13,00,000/-. In default of payment of fine amount, the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for six months. Out of the total fine amount of Rs.13,00,000/-, an amount of Rs.12,80,000/- is awarded as compensation to the complainant. Acting u/S 424(1)(a) of Cr.P.C. the accused is hereby directed to pay entire fine amount within 30 days from today. The bail bond of the accused and surety stands cancelled subject to appeal period.” 7. Being aggrieved by the same, accused filed an appeal before the District Court in Criminal Appeal No.5/2017. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court after securing the records heard the arguments of the parties and by impugned Judgment dated 24.02.2021, dismissed the appeal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1051 CRL.RP No. 100095 of 2021 8. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused is before this Court in this revision petition. 9. Sri Neelendra D.Gunde, learned counsel for the revision petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, contented that both the Courts have not properly appreciated the material placed on record. 10. He further contended that accused was only a co-obligant and he was not at all responsible for the legally recoverable debt. It is also contended that civil proceeding has also been initiated for recovery of the loan amount and thus sought for allowing the revision petition. 11. Per contra, N.M.Patil, learned counsel for respondent/bank supports the impugned orders. 12. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 13. On such perusal of the material on record, it is not in dispute that the accused has issued the cheque as a co-obligant - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1051 CRL.RP No. 100095 of 2021 to the complainant/bank and signature found therein is that of the accused. 14. The amount covered under the cheque is the amount due to the complainant bank by the original borrowers. Same is depicted through Exs.P-12 and P-13. 15. Admittedly, cheque has been dishonored with an endorsement ‘funds insufficient’. There was no reply to the callings of the legal notice nor there was any compliance. 16. Thus, the complainant has discharged the initial burden by placing necessary oral and documentary evidence on record so as to raise the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 17. No doubt, such a presumption is a rebuttable presumption. In order to rebut the said presumption, there is no oral or documentary evidence placed on record by the accused. Mere pendency of civil proceedings for recovery of the loan amount would not be sufficient enough to hold that the accused has rebutted the presumption available under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1051 CRL.RP No. 100095 of 2021 18. If the amount is paid by the accused to the bank, he can exercise the right of subrogation as he would step into the shoes of the creditor and he can recover the cheque amount from the original borrowers. 19. Further, amount recovered by the bank would be definitely given deduction to in the pending civil proceedings. 20. With that observation, this Court does not find any good reasons to allow the revision petition having regard to the scope of the revision petition. 21. Having noted thus, learned Trial Magistrate has imposed Rs.20,000/- as the fine towards the defraying expenses of the State. 22. Since the lis is privy to the parties and no State machinery is involved, imposition of fine of Rs.20,000/- towards defraying expense of the State out of the fine amount cannot be countenanced in law. To that extent, revision petition needs to be allowed. 23. Hence, the following: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1051 CRL.RP No. 100095 of 2021 ORDER (i) Revision Petition is allowed in part. (ii) While maintaining the conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiating Instruments Act, fine amount of Rs.13,00,000/- imposed by the Trial Magistrate is reduced to Rs.12,80,000/-. (iii) Entire sum of Rs.12,80,000/- is ordered to be paid as compensation to the complainant bank. (iv) Imposition of Rs.20,000/- towards the defraying expense of the State out of the fine amount is hereby set aside. (v) Amount in deposit is ordered to be withdrawn by the complainant bank under due identification. (vi) Balance amount to be paid on or before 20th February 2026. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1051 CRL.RP No. 100095 of 2021 (vii) Office is directed to return the Trial Court records forthwith, along with copy of this order for issue of modified conviction warrant. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm CT-CMU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 16