Karnataka High Court
M/S Swathi Industries Sarathi Shop vs Hitesh Traders on 24 November, 2008
Author: N.Ananda
Bench: N.Ananda
IN THE HIGH COURT 0? KARNATAKA fix
CIRCUIT BENCH AT.BHARw'gétj'V"'%' .
DATED THIS THE 24% ms' €21?'
BE};"1C3§%?.E V _
THE HON'BL_E MR.J§fS?ICEj_VN.A.NAN}QAAV.i§
CRIMINAL REv1$iE:;N. 2"5E'rs.;f;s:Q"N jVN:(f);1779/2005
BETWEEN: V
1. M] s.Swatlii In é;i1_s1'ufir:s "" "
Sarathi '_
i'\Iaraha11;:_;a.g*.af,HBanga.}c}r¥: «mad
Cha13a1:fi1'i,'jDisfi:§.-st {'3.hitrac¥.£1"rga"V
Reptd. By "1:s_-vManagi,I1g*' .3?a.rt1_1:=:;r
B.CQVer1katfish.M11r:1;j:;___ " _
2. 8.C.Ve1:;kate%5h Rimthy '
Aged ab-:u.1t 53 " V
Occ:Bu*--§irzéss " .
P3rtI:er'oi7.'E3w'¢1t,hi Indus '63
V 'iiistiict Chittadurga.
3. BS3...
Aged abou1;.5()' 'years
.Occ:Bi1si1I:*,ss" '
Partnsr Gfvswathi Industries
" ; '(;§};:;::;-J1;a.§<t:1'i,''' District Chitmdurga.
,:3::s"atis1; Baht:
._ Ageo? about 48 years
, _ '€}£:c::Busiz1ess
'Partner of Swaihi infiusitties
A A n Challakeri, District Chitzadurga. ..,pet.it:ioners
"(By Sri.S.P.Ku1ka1'z1.i, A»:£v., -- absent --)
_ S.J.,.,«}§}adag.
IQ
AND:
1, HitesI1Traders
Gadag.
By ita Manager
Mangilal Nenamai Shzimal @ Ja:i:::~~
()cc:Business, Rf 0.Gradag ' '
District Gaciag.
2. The State of Kanizataka
Rep. by its P.P. at Gafiag » . " .
New reptd. By State Public Pxxisficutor
Kaxnataka High Cov.rt..Buicfiifig "
Banga1oe~56O 001. ' ' ' V " ...respo11€ient$
(By Sri M.Partha._Adv.,Afcr. E~.}) --._ '
Thiav revi.s1£:_n pe':::;:a'n is fileei under section
397 ( 1:) I'/'W1 "$£_c.f1{}7£ "'€L§r.P.C. praying to set asicie: the
judgmeizt/'aider '-canvic-ti_r§13 and sentence dated 5.2.2005
in c.c:.M579;93_<m."the'~f;1eof the I Add}. JMFCL, Gaciag and
set aside Vt1u:3 ju<:i'g;m€;:1t/.<;_>idcr of convictioza and sentance
datfid. --28.7.2(3Q_6 Cr'i.A..N0.6/O5 on the file of the Dist 8?,
'E1313; revision petition coming on for admissi-an
éaygtiie cielivereci the fclimving:
ORDER
A. , T313 :pc'r.iti011¢3:rs are tried, convixzicd and sentsnced for ._ c;"&'ei1.2h punishabie undm" scctitm 138 of Negotiable
-§fi§fI'l21I16].'itS Act. There are cencurrent findings of the trial court and E Appellatsr Court. j m'''' I' "'&/~'& r':
' .. had raised seve:'ai.--rifoiitt3ii"ié(§1iF:. . denying thair liability. Hcwever 1;ad.*:1{>t-j '*~ iSSi1811C€3 of chcquex as aforestatcd.:'».__T13_:t ljzidggii 011 consideration of evidence .l'ia.s_ heid.?;'r1at th::V':*¢s;vp§)nd_::ntS have failed 1:0 rebut the })réS"i¥iIt;)iCiOI1" lllidfiil' sectioi-1138 sf Negotiablié.I_i§,$t.1'"L--i§:}:1c;.:?i?i$" _ 5; The yfifi§01%fii'S~ --1iaC3" 355$? to deny their iiabiiity 03% 'Chc§11§és were issued by I ' ' ' ' 'I V' M;"T:; Swathi 'Indusnies. The petitioners had rajfied su'~s§1"aA ---.ifi'e'f:3'1"e this court. This ceurt 113$ llerid, -- ..
'-.i._.€"£§"ia sister fiéfiéém voimzzteers to issue a cheque Vi " -V . -of a liability iiicurred by anotlier sister the Drawee Concem cannot be hf;_ard_tc$i say that there was 11:; liabiiity to be €{i$é:harg€d by the Drawee Concern and herzce, it n 'i 'cannot be proceedefi againgt 11/ S 138.... has finiher heid:
"The Swati Industries, by taking uyon itself the burden of discharging the iiahiiity of Pragati iziidustries, am} 91:: that acccxunt issueé 3, W? a§\~ié:wv~0€ie~2 : 5 : cheque, has thereby bczsund itsrtlf to diachargq certain debt or liability and that is how, issue cheque: needed to be viewed."
The afcmsiated juégment is I't3p<}I't€d in -., 4079. Therefore, centcntion of liability has been rightly rejact,-::r_,1_ by .V A. 2
6. The I Agapfillate ¢Z7,"a:.v2:1"r£ G,}.f1 ré--i:'1pp;.tc§ati<3n of evidence and various petitioners has confixmeé the findings gf"the::"Lr"ia1._éo1@'i; .V 'A "
= 'G11V'ffi§<31j;isi.véduez:;%;§ti0'n'of the matter, I find that the conzts balm; havV€§' :1§§"t'.c:)§;:i§i,:x1itte€}L any glaring errors of law or fis;i:;tak£§;s' =.i:f1V_a.p;(3reciati<);1 of law. Therézfere, E dc» not vAg:*fii:nds to interfere with the impugned judgment. __is }::7;is1nissed at the stage of aémission. sd/-5 Iudgé