Karnataka High Court
Sri. Sumit Tandon vs Sri. Krishna Fabrics on 16 February, 2026
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 464 OF 2019
C/W
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 463 OF 2019,
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 465 OF 2019,
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 466 OF 2019
IN CRL.RP No. 464/2019:
BETWEEN:
SRI SUMIT TANDON
S/O PN TANDON
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
RESIDING AT C-25
MAHENDRU ENCLAVE
DELHI - 110 033.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI THARANATH SHETTY K, ADV.)
AND:
Digitally SRI KRISHNA FABRICS
signed by NO.1, I FLOOR
NANDINI M S
15TH A CROSS
Location:
HIGH COURT 4TH MAIN, S.R. NAGAR
OF BANGALORE - 560 027
KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETRIX
SMT UMA MAHESHWARI.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI MALLANAGOUD (NOC), ADV.)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION
DATED 24.02.2016, PASSED IN C.C.NO.17203/2012, ON THE FILE
OF THE 27TH A.C.M.M., AT BANGALORE AND CONFIRMED BY THE
JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 27.02.2019 PASSED IN
CRL.A.NO.362/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE 55TH ADDITIONAL CITY
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE CITY, BY ALLOWING
THIS CRL.RP.
IN CRL.RP NO. 463/2019:
BETWEEN:
SRI SUMIT TANDON
S/O P.N. TANDON
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
RESIDING AT C-25
MAHENDRU ENCLAVE
DELHI - 110 033.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI THARANATH SHETTY K, ADV.)
AND:
SRI KRISHNA FABRICS
NO.1, I FLOOR, 15TH "A" CROSS,
4TH MAIN, S.R. NAGAR
BANGALORE-560 027
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETRIX
SMT. UMA MAHESHWARI.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI MALLANAGOUD (NOC), ADV.)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S. CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT DATED 27.02.2019 PASSED BY THE
LV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU
IN CRL.A.NO.361/2016 AND THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.02.2016
PASSED BY THE XXVII ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU IN
C.C.NO.17202/2012, BY ALLOWING THIS CRL.RP.I.A.NO.1/2019
FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE.I.A.NO.1/2019 FILED BY THE
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO SUSPEND THE
ORDER DATED 27.02.2019 PASSED BY THE LV ADDITIONAL CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU IN
CRL.A.NO.361/2016 AND THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.02.2016
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
PASSED BY THE XXVII ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU IN
C.C.NO.17202/2012, PENDING DISPOSAL OF THIS CRL.RP.
IN CRL.RP NO. 465/2019:
BETWEEN:
SRI SUMIT TANDON
S/O P.N. TANDON
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
RESIDING AT C-25
MAHENDRU ENCLAVE
DELHI - 110 033.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI THARANATH SHETTY K, ADV.)
AND:
SRI KRISHNA FABRICS
NO.1, I FLOOR, 15TH A CROSS
4TH MAIN, S R NAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 027
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETRIX
SMT UMA MAHESHWARI.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI MALLANAGOUD (NOC), ADV.)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED
27.02.2019 PASSED IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.363/2016, ON THE
FILE OF THE 55th ADDITIONAL CITY CIIVL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, AT BENGALURU CITY AND THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER
DATED 24.02.2016 PASSED IN C.C.NO.17204/2012 ON THE FILE
OF THE 27th ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
AT BENGALURU, BY ALLOWING THIS CRIMINAL REVISION
PETITION.
IN CRL.RP NO. 466/2019:
BETWEEN:
SRI SUMIT TANDON
S/O P.N. TANDON
R/AT C-25, MAHENDRU ENCLAVE
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
DELHI - 110 033.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI THARANATH SHETTY K, ADV.)
AND:
SRI KRISHNA FABRICS
NO.1, I FLOOR, 15TH A CROSS
4TH MAIN, S.R.NAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 027
REP BY ITS PROPRIETRIX
SMT. UMA MAHESHWARI.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI MALLANAGOUD (NOC), ADV.)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED
27.02.2019 PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.364/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE
55th ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
BANGALORE AND THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED
24.02.2016 PASSED IN C.C.NO.17205/2012 ON THE FILE OF
THE 27th A.C.M.M., BANGALORE BY ALLOWING THIS CRL.RP.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR REPORTING
SETTLEMENT, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL COMMON ORDER
1. The above-captioned four criminal revision petitions
arise between the same parties and from the same transaction
and therefore, they are heard together with the consent of the
learned counsel appearing for the parties and are disposed of
by this common order.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
-5-
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
3. Respondent herein had initiated four separate
proceedings against Company known as "Fortune Graphics
Ltd," and the petitioner herein, who is the Director of the
aforesaid Company for offence punishable under Section 138 of
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'N.I. Act') before
the jurisdictional Court of Magistrate at Bangalore in
C.CNo.17202 of 2012, 17203 of 2012, 17204 of 2012 and
17205 of 2012. It is the case of the respondent complainant
that in the month of July 2011, petitioner herein had
approached the respondent, representing himself to be the
Director of the accused no.1 Company and had placed orders
for purchase of silk fabric. Accordingly, complainant had
supplied goods worth ₹.58,01,162.25 paisa to the accused and
on receipt of the goods, an amount of ₹.15,50,455.25 paisa
was paid and towards balance amount of ₹.42,50,707/-,
accused had issued the cheques in question, which are subject
matter of proceedings in C.C.No.17202 of 2012, 17203 of
2012, 17204 of 2012 and 17205 of 2012 and the said cheques
when presented for realisation were dishonoured by the drawee
bank with a shara "insufficient funds" in the bank account of
-6-
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
the accused. The legal notice that was got issued on behalf of
the respondent to the accused thereafter was served and since
accused had failed to repay the amount covered under the
cheques in question, in spite of service of legal notice,
proceedings were initiated against accused nos.1 and 2 by the
respondent in the aforesaid four cases for offence punishable
under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.
4. In the said proceedings, by a common judgment
and order, the accused were convicted for offence punishable
under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced to pay
₹.40,00,000/-, ₹.9,40,000/-, ₹.20,00,000/- and ₹.12,00,000/-
in C.C.No.17202 of 2012, CC No. 17203 of 2012, 17204 of
2012 and 17205 of 2012 respectively with interest at 9% per
annum from the date of cheque till payment of the entire
amount. The said judgment and order of conviction and
sentence passed by the Trial Court in the aforesaid four cases
was confirmed by the Appellate Court by separate judgment
and order dated 27.02.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal No.361
of 2016, 362 of 2016, 363 of 2016 and 364 of 2016. Assailing
the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed in
-7-
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
the aforesaid four cases, accused no. 2 is before this Court in
these four revision petitions.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing the
matter for sometime submits that, as against accused no.1
Company, liquidation proceedings has been initiated by the
respondent company herein which is pending consideration
before the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, Special
Bench in Company Petition No. (IB) 245 (PB) / 2018. He
submits that, petitioner, who is accused no.2 is one of the
Director of the accused no.1 Company and is ready and willing
to pay the cheque amount to the respondent Company, if some
reasonable time is granted. He submits that, 50% of the
cheque amount, which is deposited by the petitioner has been
already withdrawn by the respondent Company. He has placed
reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of SANJABIJ TARI V KISHORE S. BORCAR & ANR -
2025 INSC 1158 and submits that for payment of the balance
cheque amount with applicable interest as stated in the case of
SANJABIJ TARI (supra), five monthly instalments may be
granted.
-8-
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent has
argued in support of the impugned judgment and order and
submits that, as on the date the impugned judgment and
orders were passed, the judgment in the case of SANJABIJ
TARI (supra), was not in existence and therefore, the principle
laid down in the said judgment cannot be made applicable to
the case on hand. He submits that, proceedings were initiated
against the accused in the present case in the year 2012 and
till date only 50% of the cheque amount has been received by
the respondent. The transaction has been proved by the
respondent by producing necessary oral and documentary
evidence before the Trial Court and the accused have not
disputed the transaction or the issuance of the cheques in
question. He also submits that ratio decidendi laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SANJABIJ TARI (supra)
cannot be made applicable to facts and circumstances of the
present case. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petitions.
7. It is not in dispute that the signature found in the
cheques in question is of the petitioner herein and it is also not
in dispute that the cheques were drawn on the account of
-9-
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
accused no.1 Company maintained by it in Kotak Mahindra
Bank, Axis Bank Ltd and Punjab National Bank Ltd. The Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of DAMODAR S. PRABHU V
SAYED BABALAL H - (2010) 5 SCC 663 had framed certain
guidelines for compounding of the offences under the
Negotiable Instruments Act. In the case of SANJABIJ TARI
(supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has revisited the guidelines
laid down by it earlier in the case of DAMODAR S PRABHU
(supra) and in paragraph nos.37, 38 and 39 it is observed as
follows.
"37. It is pertinent to mention that this Court framed
guidelines for compounding offences under the NI Act nearly
fifteen years back in Damodar S.Prabhu (supra). The relevant
portion of the said Judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"THE GUIDELINES
(i) In the circumstances, it is proposed as follows:
(a) That directions can be given that the writ of
summons be suitably modified making it clear to the
accused that he could make an application for
compounding of the offences at the first or second
hearing of the case and that if such an application is
made, compounding may be allowed by the court
without imposing any costs on the accused.
(b) If the accused does not make an application for
compounding as aforesaid, then if an application for
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
compounding is made before the Magistrate at a
subsequent stage, compounding can be allowed
subject to the condition that the accused will be
required to pay 10% of the cheque amount to be
deposited as a condition for compounding with the
Legal Services Authority, or such authority as the court
deems fit.
(c) Similarly, if the application for compounding is
made before the Sessions Court or a High Court in
revision or appeal, such compounding may be allowed
on the condition that the accused pays 15% of the
cheque amount by way of costs.
(d) Finally, if the application for compounding is made
before the Supreme Court, the figure would increase to
20% of the cheque amount.
xxx xxx xxx
24. We are also conscious of the view that the judicial
endorsement of the abovequoted Guidelines could be
seen as an act of judicial law-making and therefore an
intrusion into the
legislative domain. It must be kept in mind that
Section 147 of the Act does not carry any guidance on
how to proceed with the
compounding of offences under the Act. We have
already explained that the scheme contemplated under
Section 320 CrPC Criminal Appeal No.1755/2010 Page
18 of 19 cannot be followed in the strict sense. In view
of the legislative vacuum, we see no hurdle to the
endorsement of some suggestions which have been
designed to discourage litigants from unduly delaying
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
the composition of the offence in cases involving
Section 138 of the Act.
25. The graded scheme for imposing costs is a means
to encourage compounding at an early stage of
litigation. In the status quo, valuable time of the court
is spent on the trial of these cases and the parties are
not liable to pay any court fee since the proceedings
are governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure even
though the impact of the offence is largely confined to
the private parties. Even though the imposition of
costs by the competent court is a matter of discretion,
the scale of costs has been suggested in the interest of
uniformity. The competent court can of course reduce
the costs with regard to the specific facts and
circumstances of a case, while recording reasons in
writing for such variance. Bona fide litigants should of
course contest the proceedings to their logical end.
26. Even in the past, this Court has used its power to
do complete justice under Article 142 of the
Constitution to frame guidelines in relation to the
subject-matter where there was a legislative vacuum."
38. Since a very large number of cheque bouncing
cases are still pending and interest rates have fallen in the
last few years, this Court is of the view that it is time to
'revisit and tweak the guidelines'. Accordingly, the aforesaid
guidelines of compounding are modified as under:-
(a) If the accused pays the cheque amount before
recording of his evidence (namely defence evidence),
then the Trial Court may allow compounding of the
offence without imposing any cost or penalty on the
accused.
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
(b) If the accused makes the payment of the cheque
amount post the recording of his evidence but prior to
the pronouncement of judgment by the Trial Court, the
Magistrate may allow compounding of the offence on
payment of additional 5% of the cheque amount with
the Legal Services Authority or such other Authority as
the Court deems fit.
(c) Similarly, if the payment of cheque amount is made
before the Sessions Court or a High Court in Revision
or Appeal, such Court may compound the offence on
the condition that the accused pays 7.5% of the
cheque amount by way of costs.
(d) Finally, if the cheque amount is tendered before
this Court, the figure would increase to 10% of the
cheque amount.
39. This Court is of the view that if the Accused is
willing to pay in accordance with the aforesaid guidelines, the
Court may suggest to the parties to go for compounding. If
for any reason, the financial institutions/complainant asks for
payment other than the cheque amount or settlement of
entire loan or other outstanding dues, then the Magistrate
may suggest to the Accused to plead guilty and exercise the
power under Section 255(2) and/or 255(3) of the Cr.P.C. or
278 of the BNSS, 2023 and/or give the benefit under the
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to the Accused."
8. The petitioner, who is accused no.2 in the present
case has submitted that he is ready and willing to compound
the offence as provided in Clause (e) of paragraph no.38 in the
- 13 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
case of SANJABIJ TARI (supra),. However, learned counsel
for the respondent submits that, he is not agreeable for the
settlement proposed by the petitioner.
9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
SANJABIJ TARI (supra), has observed that, if for any reason
the complainant asks for payment other than the cheque
amount or settlement of entire amount or other outstanding
dues, then the Courts are at liberty to suggest to the accused
to plead guilty and exercise the powers under Section 255(2)
and/or 255(3) of Cr.P.C, or 278 of the BNSS, 2023 and/or give
the benefit under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.
10. The cheque amount with cost at 7.5% of the
cheque amount totally amounts to Rs.43,73,250/-, petitioner
has already deposited 50% of the cheque amount and
undisputedly the respondent has withdrawn the same. Under
the circumstances, if the petitioner is directed to deposit the
balance of the cheque amount and also pay costs at the rate of
7.5% of the cheque amount as provided in the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SANJABIJ TARI (supra),
the same would serve the ends of justice.
- 14 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9337
CRL.RP No. 464 of 2019
C/W CRL.RP No. 463 of 2019
CRL.RP No. 465 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
11. Accordingly, the following:-
ORDER
i. Criminal Revision Petitions are partly allowed.
ii. The impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by the Courts below in all the four cases are confirmed and the order of sentence passed in the said cases is modified and the petitioner is directed to pay a total sum of Rs.43,73,250/- to the respondent inclusive of the amount already deposited.
iii. The balance amount shall be paid by the petitioner to the respondent in five equated monthly instalments commencing from 01.03.2026.
Sd/-
(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE NMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53