Karnataka High Court
A Solomon vs Dr Usha U Rao on 17 July, 2012
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda
Bench: A.N. Venugopala Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1254/2008
BETWEEN:
A. Solomon,
S/o. Alphonraj,
Aged 39 years, R/o. No.5,
Ac/952, Rajathadri I Block,
HRBR Layout, Kalyananagara,
Bangalore - 560 043.
... PETITIONER
(By Sri P.R. Chitnis, Adv.)
AND:
Dr. Usha U. Rao,
W/o. B.S. Venkat Rao,
Aged 60 years, R/o. No.7,
Venkateshwara Layout,
Nagashettihalli, Sanjayanagara,
Bangalore - 560 094.
... RESPONDENT
(By Sri Satyanarayana, Adv.)
This Crl.R.P. is filed under Section 397 & 401 Cr.P.C.
by the Advocate for the petitioner praying to set aside the
Judgment, conviction and sentence dated 16.10.2006
passed by the XII Addl. CMM, Bangalore in
2
C.C.No.15151/2006 and the Judgment dated 21.10.2008
passed by the City Fast Track (Sessions) Judge, FTC-II,
Bangalore city in Crl.A.No.1274/2007 and be pleased to
acquit the petitioner.
This Crl.R.P. coming on for orders this day, the Court
made the following:
ORDER
Respondent filed a complaint under S.200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against petitioner alleging commission of an offence under S.138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act ("the Act" for short). It was stated therein by complainant that, petitioner borrowed from her Rs.5,00,000/- during the first week of November, 2005 and in discharge of the said liability, issued a cheque dated 28.12.2005 drawn on ICICI Bank Ltd., Bangalore Branch, for Rs.5,00,000/-, which on presentation was not honoured by the bank and was returned with an endorsement as 'payment stopped by drawer'. A demand notice was served and the cheque amount was not paid. Petitioner who was arrayed as accused in the said complaint appeared through his counsel and pleaded not guilty. 3 Complainant deposed as PW.1 and Exs.P1 to P10 were marked. Statement of the petitioner was recorded and he also got himself examined as DW.1 and marked Exs.D1 and D2. Learned Magistrate having regard to the rival contentions and record of the case, found that petitioner herein has committed the offence under S.138 of the Act and as a result, passed an order of conviction under S.255(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ("Cr.P.C." for short) and sentenced to pay fine of Rs.6,00,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months. The complainant was held entitled to receive Rs.5,00,000/- out of the fine amount.
2. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner filed an appeal under S.374 Cr.P.C. in the Sessions Court. The matter having been assigned to the Fast Track Judge, upon consideration of the rival contentions, the appeal having been found to be devoid of merit was dismissed by a judgment dated 21.10.2008. The conviction and sentence imposed by the 4 learned Magistrate were upheld. This revision petition is directed against the said order and the judgment.
3. Both the parties through their learned counsel filed an application under S.147 of the Act, in which it has been stated that Rs.1,50,000/- which was ordered to be deposited on 1.12.2008 was deposited on 26.12.2008. It has been further stated that the parties have agreed for amicable settlement and respondent has agreed to receive Rs.5,00,000/- from petitioner inclusive of Rs.1,50,000/- as already deposited, in full and final settlement. Petitioner has delivered D.D.No.201622 dated 11.7.2012 drawn on Canara Bank, Kalyananagara Branch, Bangalore, which petitioner acknowledged. Petitioner has no objection for release of the deposited amount which is lying in deposit in the Trial Court.
4. Keeping in view the ratio of decision reported in K.M.Ibrahim Vs. K.P.Mohammed and another ((2010) 1 SCC 798), the compounding of the matter by the parties can be allowed.
5
5. Since the parties have settled the dispute in keeping with the spirit of S.147 of the Act, I allow the parties to compound the offence and a result, set aside the judgment and order impugned in this revision petition passed by the Courts below and acquit petitioner of the charges against him. Respondent is at liberty to encash the Demand Draft delivered to her and the Trial Court is directed to release Rs.1,50,000/- lying in deposit to the complaint/respondent herein. The bail bonds executed in the matter by petitioner and the sureties are hereby cancelled.
Revision petition is accordingly allowed in the aforesaid terms.
Sd/-
JUDGE Ksj/-