- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12494 CRL.RP No. 694 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 694 OF 2021 (397(Cr.PC) / 438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI.T.M.NARAYANASWAMY S/O MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS EX. VIJAYA BANK EMPLOYEE R/AT 4TH CROSS GOWRIPET, KOLAR CITY KOLAR 563101 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINATHA B.V., FOR SRI. NANJUNDA GOWDA M R., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI.VENKATANARAYANA G S/O GANGULAPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT OLD TILE FACTORY LAYOUT BANGARPET CIRCLE KOLAR CITY KOLAR 563101 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. J.UMESH REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B VISWESWARAIAH., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION, SENTENCE AND FINE IMPOSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KOLAR Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12494 CRL.RP No. 694 of 2021 VIDE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 13.03.2019 PASSED IN C.C.NO.746/2018 BY CONVICTING THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF NI ACT AND SENTENCED HIM TO PAY FINE OF RS.1,30,000/- IN DEFAULT THE PETITIONER SHALL UNDERGO S.I FOR 6 MONTHS AND JUDGEMENT AND ORDER DATED 05.03.2021 PASSED IN CRLA..NO.35/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLAR AND BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL. THE PETITIONER BE PLEASED TO ACQUIT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I ACT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri.Srinatha B. V., learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri.Nanjunda Gowda M. R., learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri.J.Umesh Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri.B.Visweswaraiah, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Accused who has suffered an order of conviction in CC No.746/2018 dated 13.03.2019 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act which was confirmed Crl.A.No.35/2019 is the revision petitioner. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12494 CRL.RP No. 694 of 2021 3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the revision petition are as under: 3.1. A private complaint came to be filed under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. alleging the commission of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by contending that accused being the employee of Vijaya Bank, was acquainted with the complainant and he borrowed sum of Rs.1,25,000/- as hand loan to meet his immediate financial requirements with an assurance that he would repay the same within short period of time. 3.2. Towards repayment of the said hand loan, a cheque bearing No.2368070 dated 18.05.2011 came to be issued which on presentation came to be dishonored with an endorsement ‘funds insufficient’. A statutory notice was caused by the complainant to the accused as is contemplated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act demanding payment which was duly - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12494 CRL.RP No. 694 of 2021 served and an untanable reply came to be issued. Thereafter, complainant sought for action against the accused. 4. Learned Trial Magistrate after completing necessary formalities, recorded the evidence of the complainant wherein he got examined himself as P.W.1 and placed on record seven documents which were exhibited and marked as Exs.P.1 to 7. 5. As against the oral and documentary evidence placed on record, accused got examined himself as D.W.1 and reiterated the contents of the reply notice. 6. On conclusion of recording of the evidence, accused statement as is contemplated under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. is recorded and thereafter, learned Trial Magistrate heard the arguments of the parties in detail and convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and imposed sum of Rs.1,30,000/- as fine amount of which - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12494 CRL.RP No. 694 of 2021 sum of Rs.1,25,000/- was ordered to be paid as compensation to the complainant and balance sum of Rs.5,000/- towards defraying expenses of the State. 7. Being aggrieved by the same, accused filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.35/2019. 8. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court after securing the records, heard the arguments of the parties in detail and by considered judgment dated 05.03.2021, dismissed the appeal filed by the accused and confirmed the order of conviction and sentence. 9. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused is before this Court, in this revision petition. 10. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the petition vehemently contended that cheque was not issued to the complainant and it was issued to Adinarayana which has been misused by the complainant in active collusion with Adinarayana. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12494 CRL.RP No. 694 of 2021 Therefore, there is no legally recoverable debt between the complainant and accused and sought for allowing the revision petition. 11. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent supports the impugned judgments. 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 seen that Ex.P.1 - cheque is belonging to the accused and signature found therein is that of the accused. 14. Complainant has contended that accused borrowed sum of Rs.1,25,000/- from him as hand loan and towards repayment of the same, cheque in question came to be issued. 15. As against the same, accused has taken a defence that cheque was actually issued to Adinarayana and therefore, there was no legally recoverable debt. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12494 CRL.RP No. 694 of 2021 16. To substantiate that cheque was issued to Adinarayana, there is no material evidence on record except the oral testimony of the accused. 17. Counter foil of the cheque book is not placed on record nor Adinarayana is examined to establish that cheque in question was in fact issued to Adinarayana. 18. Accused being the employee of Vijaya Bank, who was under suspension, knew very well what are the consequences of issuing a cheque to some person. 19. No stop payment instructions were issued if the cheque has been issued to Adinarayana. Further, no positive action is taken against the complainant especially when a reply notice is issued to the complainant. No criminal complaint is also filed against Adinarayana or the complainant for misuse of the cheque. 20. Taking note of these aspects of the matter, learned Trial Magistrate did not deem it fit to consider the oral evidence of D.W.1 as sufficient rebuttal evidence to - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12494 CRL.RP No. 694 of 2021 rebut the presumption available to the complainant under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and has rightly convicted the accused. 21. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court did not find any positive materials even after reappreciation of the material evidence on record to reverse the finding. 22. As such, having regard to the limited scope of the revisional jurisdiction, this Court does not find any good grounds to interfere with the order of conviction. 23. However, since the lis is privy to the parties and no State machinery is involved, imposing fine amount of Rs.5,000/- towards defraying expenses of the State is totally uncalled for and requires interference in this revision. 24. Hence, following: ORDER i. Criminal Revision Petition is allowed in part. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12494 CRL.RP No. 694 of 2021 ii. While maintaining the conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the compensation amount ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate confirmed by the First Appellate Court in a sum of Rs.1,30,000/- is reduced to sum of Rs.1,25,000/-. iii. Amount of compensation in a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- shall be paid to the complainant on or before 15.03.2026 failing which the revision petitioner shall undergo imprisonment as ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate confirmed by the First Appellate Court. iv. Amount of Rs.5,000/- imposed by the learned Trial Magistrate confirmed by the First Appellate Court stands set aside. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12494 CRL.RP No. 694 of 2021 v. Amount in deposit is ordered to be withdrawn by the complainant under due identification. Office is directed to return the Trial Court Records with copy of this order forthwith. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40