- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2008 CRL.RP No. 100301 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100301 OF 2025 (397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI. RAGHAVENDRA TIRUKAPPA ADUR, AGE. 36 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER, R/O. ALALLI, TQ. MUNDGOD, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581349. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. I.Y. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. YELLAPPA PANDURANGA MANDAKKI AGE. 36 YEARS, OCC. EMPLOYEE, R/O. AREGOPPA, (BOMMANALLI), TQ. HANGAL, DIST. HAVERI-581203. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ANIL H. BUDARPUR, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397(1) R/W. 401 OF THE CR.P.C., R/W. 438 AND 442 OF BNSS, PRAYING TO PASS AN ORDER TO SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.05.2025 PASED IN CRL.APPEAL NO. 5066/2024 BY THE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, KARWAR SITTING AT SIRSI BY ACQUITTING ACCUSED IN CC NO. 264/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, MUNDGOD FOR OFFENCE P/U/SEC. 138 OF NI ACT REVISION PETITION. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Date: 2026.02.13 15:47:45 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2008 CRL.RP No. 100301 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Parties is present. Settlement not reported. 2. Heard. Revision petitioner is the accused, who suffered an order of conviction in C.C No.264/2022 on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, Mundgod, confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.5066/2024 on the file of the I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Karwar, sitting at Sirsi, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to pay fine in a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- of which Rs.1,20,000/- was ordered to be paid as compensation and balance of Rs.5,000/- towards the defraying expenses of the State with default sentence of 30 days. 3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present revision petition are as under: A private complaint came to be filed under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure alleging commission of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 4. Learned Trial Judge after due trial convicted the accused noting the fact that there was no defence evidence and cheque - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2008 CRL.RP No. 100301 of 2025 belongs to the accused and signature found therein is that of the accused. 5. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court on re- appreciation of the material on record dismissed the appeal. 6. Being further aggrieved by the same, revision petitioner is before this Court. 7. Sri I.Y.Patil, learned counsel would contend that as per the transaction, only Rs.1,00,000/- has been obtained as loan from the complainant by the accused of which, amount in sum of Rs.50,000/- is already paid. Towards the balance sum of Rs.50,000/- a cheque was given in a sum of Rs.25,000/- which has been altered by the complainant by inserting the numerical ‘1’ behind the amount Rs.25,000/-. 8. Therefore, there is no legally recoverable debt and sought for admitting the revision petition for further consideration. 9. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent supports the impugned judgment by contending that such a defence was not at all taken before the Trial Court and for the first time it has - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2008 CRL.RP No. 100301 of 2025 been sought to be urged before this Court and sought for dismissal of the revision petition. 10. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 11. On such perusal, it is noticed that the cheque which is dishonored belongs to the accused and signature found therein is that of the accused. 12. Loan transaction is admitted and plea of discharge of Rs.50,000/- is not probabilised by placing any material evidence on record. 13. There is no defence at all placed on the record so as to hold that the presumption is rebutted. 14. In the cross-examination of PW-1 also, the theory that is now put forward before this Court is not enunciated and therefore, no answers are elicited which is favourable to the accused so as to hold that the accused has not committed the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2008 CRL.RP No. 100301 of 2025 15. Accordingly, this Court does not find any good grounds to interfere with the conviction order. 16. However, imposing Rs.5,000/- towards the defraying expenses of the State out of the fine amount cannot be countenanced in law, as lis is privy to the parties and no State machinery is involved. 17. Hence, the following: ORDER i. Revision Petition is allowed in part. ii. While maintaining the conviction of the revision petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, fine amount of Rs.1,25,000/- is reduced to Rs.1,20,000/-. iii. Entire amount of Rs.1,20,000/- is ordered to be paid as compensation to the complainant under due identification. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2008 CRL.RP No. 100301 of 2025 iv. Sum of Rs.5,000/- imposed by the Trial Court confirmed by the First Appellate Court towards defraying expenses of the State is hereby set aside. v. Amount in deposit, if any, is ordered to be withdrawn by the complainant under due identification. vi. Balance amount to be paid by the revision petitioner on or before 28th February, 2026. Office is directed to return the Trial Court Records along with the copy of this order forthwith, for issue of modified conviction warrant. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm, CT:CMU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 116