Bangalore District Court
Aparampaar Finance Pvt Ltd vs Vaishnavi Ballal on 4 August, 2025
KABC020761322024 Digitally signed
by
RAGHAVENDRA
RAGHAVENDRA SHETTIGAR
SHETTIGAR
Date:
2025.08.05
11:25:06 +0530
IN THE COURT OF XIV ADDL. SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND
ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
(SCCH-10) AT BENGALURU
Dated This The 4th day of August 2025
PRESENT:
SRI. RAGHAVENDRA SHETTIGAR,
B.A., LL.B.,
XIV ADDL. SMALL CAUSES JUDGE &
ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
BENGALURU.
C.C No.28015/2024
COMPLAINANT : M/s. Aparampaar Finance Pvt. Ltd.,
(A registered Type 2ND NBFC
company), having its registered office at:
No.6, Prestige Augusta Golf Village,
Kada Agrahara Main Road,
In front of Sai Baba Temple,
Rampura, Bengaluru - 560 049,
Reptd., by its Credit Officer,
Sri. Madhusudhan. L,
Aged about 29 years,
No.6, Prestige Augusta Golf Village,
Kada Agrahara Main Road,
In front of Sai Baba Temple,
2 C.C.No.28015/2024
SCCH-10
Rampura, Bengaluru - 560 049.
(By Sri. M.N.B., Advocate)
// Versus //
ACCUSED : Mrs. Vaishnavi Ballal,
Aged about 26 years,
D/o. Anantha Padmanabha Ballal,
R/at No.05-1E, Peradoor, Udupi,
Karnataka - 576124.
(By Sri. N.B.G., Advocate)
:: J U D G M E N T ::
This complaint is instituted by the complainant against the accused under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act- 1881 R/w Section 25 of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007.
2. The Case of the complainant as per complaint averments is as follows:
The complainant company is registered under the companies Act, 1956 and a Banking Company. The accused 3 C.C.No.28015/2024 SCCH-10 had approached the complainant company to avail loan and on agreeing to the loan transaction terms of the complainant company, the accused submitted an irrevocable repayment mandate reference token on Electronic National Automated clearing House on 29.07.2023. Thereafter, the complainant pursuance to thorough scrutiny of KYC sanctioned the loan of Rs.2,43,000/- on 24.07.2023 and the accused agreed to repay the said loan amount in 21 equated monthly installments each for Rs.15,216/- and the loan documents digitally executed on 29.07.2023. The accused repaid a total sum of Rs.58,635/-.
However, the accused is defaulter in payment of monthly installments. As on 01.07.2024, she was still due a sum of Rs.2,85,816/-. Inspite of repeated request, the accused has been neglecting to repay the overdue amount and as such the complainant constrained to initiate electronic transfer (ENACH) for said due amount on 15.07.2024. But the same was dishonoured with the remarks "insufficient account 4 C.C.No.28015/2024 SCCH-10 balance". Then, the complainant got issued a legal notice to the accused calling upon her to pay the amount. Despite receipt of notice, the accused has not paid the amount. Thus, the accused has committed the offence punishable U/Sec.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act R/w Section 25(1) of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007. Hence, this complaint.
3. After filing of the complaint, the cognizance of the offence was taken and registered criminal case against the accused and the summons was issued to her. The accused has appeared before the Court through her counsel and was enlarged on bail. Subsequently, plea was recorded and the substance of the accusation was read over and explained to her. She pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
4. In order to substantiate its case, the complainant company examined its Credit Officer as PW-1 and got marked documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.9.
5 C.C.No.28015/2024
SCCH-10
5. Both parties have filed joint memo and prayed to pass judgment as per the terms of Joint Memo.
6. Heard the arguments. Perused the materials available on record.
7. Now the points that arise for my determination are as follows:-
1) Whether the complainant proved that the accused has opted for loan repayment mode by way of ECS/NACH and a sum of Rs.2,85,816/-
was due and payable by the accused and when ECS/ NACH was presented to the bank, same was dishonoured for 'Insufficient Account Balance' and despite receipt of demand notice, the accused has not paid the amount and thereby she has committed an offence punishable under Section 25(1) of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007?
2) What order?
8. On the basis of the materials available on record, my finding to the above points are as follows:
POINT No.1 & 2: Answered accordingly as per the final order for the following:6 C.C.No.28015/2024
SCCH-10 REASONS
9. POINT NO.1 & 2:
According to the complainant, the accused approached the complainant company for financial assistance and the complainant company sanctioned the loan of Rs.2,43,000/- and the accused has opted for repayment mode vide ECS/NACH and under contract a sum of Rs.2,85,816/- was due and payable by the accused and when the ECS/NACH was presented, same was dishonoured for the reason 'Insufficient Account balance' and the complainant got issued a legal notice to the accused calling upon her to pay the said amount and despite service of notice, the accused has not paid the amount.
10. To substantiate its case, the Credit Officer of the complainant company was examined as PW-1 and got marked documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.9. PW-1 has reiterated the contents of the complaint in his affidavit about lending of loan to the accused under Digital personal loan facility, declaration 7 C.C.No.28015/2024 SCCH-10 regarding repayment of loan through ECS/NACH, presentation of the same and its dishonour and issuance of demand notice to the accused and calling upon her to pay the amount and her failure to comply the same.
11. On careful perusal of Ex.P.2 NACH Mandate Clearance report it reveals that, NACH transaction for a sum of Rs.2,85,816/- was failed for the reason 'Insufficient funds' in the account of the accused. Ex.P.3 is the Demand notice wherein it discloses that, after dishonour of ECS/NACH, the complainant caused a legal notice to the accused calling upon her to make payment. Said notice was duly served on the accused as per Ex.P.6.
12. On perusal of Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.2, it is crystal clear that the accused has opted for loan repayment mode vide ECS /NACH and when same was presented for a sum of Rs.2,85,816/- same was dishonoured for 'Insufficient funds' and 8 C.C.No.28015/2024 SCCH-10 despite service of notice the accused has failed to make the said payment.
13. In the instant case, it is significant to note that, on 04.08.2025 parties have filed a joint memo stating that, the matter is settled and accused has agreed to pay Rs.1,80,000/- in six installments i.e. Rs.30,000/- each on 01.09.2025, 01.10.2025, 01.11.2025, 01.12.2025, 01.01.2026 and 01.02.2026.
14. It is relevant to note that, by filing the joint memo, the parties have amicably settled the matter. As per Section 147 of N.I. Act, every offence punishable under the said Act is compoundable. In the present case as stated above, the parties have mutually entered into a compromise and got compounded the case and the same is reported to the Court by way of joint memo. On perusal of Joint memo, it is clear that the compromise arrived between the parties is lawful one. When the case ends in compromise, it shall have the effect of acquittal of the accused, as contemplated under Section 320(8) 9 C.C.No.28015/2024 SCCH-10 of Cr.P.C. Since it is a case where, the parties to the proceedings have compounded the matter, the accused has to be acquitted. In the similar circumstances, Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Shri. Mathikere Jayaram Shantharam V/s Shri. Pramod. C (Criminal Petition No.2998/2023 dated 21.06.2024) upheld the judgment of Trial Court in acquitting the accused. Hence, the points raised for consideration answered accordingly and I proceed to pass the following;
ORDER Acting under section 255(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act, the accused is hereby acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 25(1) of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007.
The accused shall pay settlement amount as per the Joint memo dated 04.08.2025.
10 C.C.No.28015/2024
SCCH-10 In the event of default, the complainant is at liberty to recover the same as if it were a fine, as provided U/s 431 of Cr.P.C.
The bail bond stands canceled.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, typed by her and corrected by me and then pronounced in the open Court on 4th day of August 2025).
(RAGHAVENDRA SHETTIGAR) XIV ADDL.S.C.J., ACJM & MEMBER-MACT, BENGALURU.
::A N N E X U R E::
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT:-
P.W1 : Mr. Madhusudhan. L LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT:-
Ex.P.1 : E-Nach Mandate Ex.P.2 : Returned MEMO Ex.P.3 : Demand notice 11 C.C.No.28015/2024 SCCH-10 Ex.P.4 : Postal receipt Ex.P.5 & 6 : Postal acknowledgments Ex.P.7 : E-mail communication Ex.P.8 : Authorization letter Ex.P.9 : Certificate u/s 63 of B.S.A
LIST OF WITNESSES & DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED:-
-- NIL --
(RAGHAVENDRA SHETTIGAR) XIV ADDL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & ACJM, BENGALURU.