Karnataka High Court
Basavaraj S/O Virupakshappa Kanavi vs M/S Parrys Sugar Industries Ltd on 26 September, 2023
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:11432
CRL.P No. 102074 of 2023 C/W
CRL.P No. 102077 of 2023,
CRL.P No. 102079 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102074 OF 2023
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102077 OF 2023
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102079 OF 2023
IN CRL. P. NO. 102074 OF 2023:
BETWEEN:
BASAVARAJ S/O VIRUPAKSHAPPA KANAVI,
AGE. 63 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. #75, RAJ NAGAR, HUBBALLI,
DIST. DHARWAD.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRASHANT S. HOSMANI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
M/S PARRYS SUGAR INDUSTRIES LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED & REGISTERED
UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
VIJAYALAKSHMI (EARLIER KNOWN AS GMR INDUSTRIES LTD.,HALIYAL)
M KANKUPPI VENUS BUILDING 3RD FLOOR, 1/2 KALYANAMANTAPA ROAD,
BENGALURU-560034, & ITS FACTORY AT HULLATI VILLAGE,
Digitally signed by HALIYAL, DIST. UTTARA KANANDA,
VIJAYALAKSHMI M
KANKUPPI R/BY SHRI. L S DHANAPALKSHA S/O T. SRIRANGA,
Date: 2023.10.10 AGE. 51 YEARS, OCC. MANAGER LEGAL,
11:30:00 +0530
M/S PARRYS SUGAR INDUSTRIES LTD.,
HULLATTI HALIYAL, SPECIAL POWER OF
ATTORNEY OF THE MANGING DIRECTOR,
M/S PARRY SUGAR INDUSTRIES LTD. GMR INDUSTRIES,
BENGALURU.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. HARSH DESAI, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS DATED 04.08.2023 AND
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:11432
CRL.P No. 102074 of 2023 C/W
CRL.P No. 102077 of 2023,
CRL.P No. 102079 of 2023
18.08.2023 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HALIYAL
IN CC NO. 183/2018 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C.
IN CRL. P. NO. 102077 OF 2023:
BETWEEN:
PRASHANT S/O BASAVARAJ KANAVI,
AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. #75, RAJ NAGAR, HUBBALLI,
DIST. DHARWAD.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRASHANT S. HOSMANI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
M/S PARRYS SUGAR INDUSTRIES LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED & REGISTERED
UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956,
(EARLIER KNOWN AS GMR INDUSTRIES LTD.,
HALIYAL) VENUS BUILDING 3RD FLOOR,
1/2 KALYANAMANTAPA ROAD, BENGALURU-560034,
& ITS FACTORY AT HULLATTI VILLAGE, HALIYAL,
DIST. UTTARA KANNADA R/BY SHRI L.S. DHANAPALKSHA
S/O T. SRIRANGA, AGE. 51 YEARS, OCC. MANAGER LEGAL,
M/S PARRYS SUGARS INDUSTRIES LTD., HULLATTI, HALIYAL,
SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
M/S PARRY SUGAR INDUSTRIES LTD/GMR INDUSTRIES,
BENGALURU.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. HARSH DESAI, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS DATED 04.08.2023 AND
18.08.2023 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HALIYAL
IN CC NO. 182/2018 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C FOR OFFENCE
PUNISHABLE U/SEC.138 NI ACT.
IN CRL. P. NO. 102079 OF 2023:
BETWEEN:
ARVIND S/O VIRUPAXAPPA KANAVI,
AGE. 60 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
R/O. #75, RAJ NAGAR, HUBBALLI,
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:11432
CRL.P No. 102074 of 2023 C/W
CRL.P No. 102077 of 2023,
CRL.P No. 102079 of 2023
DIST. DHARWAD.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRASHANT S. HOSMANI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
M/S PARRYS SUGAR INDUSTRIES LTD.,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED & REGISTERED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
(EARLIER KNOWN AS GMR INDUSTRIES LTD., HALIYAL)
VENUS BUILDING, 3RD FLOOR, 1/2 KALYANAMANTAPA ROAD,
BENGALURU-560034 & ITS FACTORY AT HULLATTI VILLAGE,
HALIYAL, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA,
R/BY SHRI. L S DHANAPALKSHA S/O T. SRIRANGA,
AGE. 51 YEARS, OCC. MANAGER LEGAL,
M/S PARRY SUGAR INDUSTRIES LTD., HULLATTI HALIYAL,
SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
M/S PARRY SUGAR INDUSTRIES LTD/GMR INDUSTRIES,
BENGALURU.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. HARSH DESAI, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS DATED 04.08.2023 AND
18.08.2023 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HALIYAL
IN CC NO. 184/2018 FILED FOR OFFENCES P/U/SEC. 138 OF N.I. ACT.
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. These cases arise out of different criminal case all for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the NI Act, for short).
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:11432 CRL.P No. 102074 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 102077 of 2023, CRL.P No. 102079 of 2023
2. The parties except the petitioners to the lis are common, and therefore the petitions are taken up together and considered by this common order.
3. Heard the learned counsel Sri.Prasant S. Hosmani appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel Sri.Harsh Desai appearing for the respondent.
4. Facts in brief germane are as follows.:
The petitioners are accused in all these cases and the respondent complainant. The 2 are said to have a transaction in the year 2012 and in furtherance of which, certain cheques are issued by the petitioner in favor of the respondent. Those having been presented, are returned for want of sufficient funds, and therefore the respondent initiates proceedings invoking Section 200 of Cr.P.C. on 13.07.2012. The issue in the lis is not concerning the merit of the matter. On 27.12.2017, the respondent files an application seeking reference of the disputed documents to Forensic Science Laboratory, Bangalore(for short, 'the FSL') for reference to an handwriting expert. What comes about is a report submitted by Truth Labs and not the FSL. The petitioner then files his -5- NC: 2023:KHC-D:11432 CRL.P No. 102074 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 102077 of 2023, CRL.P No. 102079 of 2023 objections to the said report and the matter was posted for orders despite the said objections. It is at that juncture, the petitioner has knocked at the doors of this Court in the subject petition.
5. The learned counsel Sri. Prashanth Hosamani appearing for the petitioners would contend that the reference was to the FSL. The opinion is of the Truth Labs bearing the same reference number. When it was not even referred to the Truth Labs, the opinion could not have emerged from Truth Labs and, therefore he would submit that the very opinion is doubtful. He would submit that the Court has to reconsider the application filed for reference to the FSL or a report from FSL in terms of the reference be sought by the concerned court. He would seek the relief to that extent.
6. The learned counsel Sri. Harsh Desai would submit that 11 years have passed by of the transaction and the matter is still languishing in the Court for one reason or the other. He would contend that, be the Truth Labs or the FSL, the report is against the petitioner. The Truth Labs is being considered for reference in all cases due to the clogging of the -6- NC: 2023:KHC-D:11432 CRL.P No. 102074 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 102077 of 2023, CRL.P No. 102079 of 2023 files before the FSL Bangalore. He would submit that the petitions be dismissed directing the concerned court to conclude the trial.
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record.
8. The afore narrated facts are not in dispute. The transaction between the petitioners and the respondent is a matter of record. What drive the petitioners to this Court is the opinion of the Truth Labs, to which no reference was even made to, by the concerned Court. An application comes to be filed in the proceedings by the respondent-complainant seeking reference of certain documents to the FSL Bangalore. On the application, the concerned court passes the order which reads as follows:
To Office of the Director, Forensic Science Laboratories, M.G. Road, Manipal Center Complex, Bangalore.
Tq & Dist: Bangalore.
Sub:- Submission of records for expert opinion reg. -000- -7-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:11432 CRL.P No. 102074 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 102077 of 2023, CRL.P No. 102079 of 2023 With reference to the above subject, Cited Supra. I am sending herewith the following original documents producing to CC No. 183/2018 on the file of this court for expert opinion of signatures of accused as required in the memo of instruction.
1) Whether Exp.1 and vakalat for the examination of questioned signature of accused.
I request you kindly submit your opinion in this regard on or before 14-11-2019.
1. Exp.1 (original cheque bearing No. 349634 (1 sheet)
2. Original agreement date. 25-06-2010 (3 sheets)
3. Vakalat (1 sheet)
4. Specimen signature sheet (1 sheet)
5. Memo of instruction (1sheet)"
9. Reference was made to the FSL Bangalore for an opinion with regard to the 5 documents that were appended to the application. Those documents were the disputed documents both by the petitioners and the respondent. The reference was made on 17.09.2019. On 16th March, 2021 the opinion is furnished. The opinion is not by the FSL Bangalore, but by the Truth Labs. When, the matter was referred to Truth Labs is not forthcoming in any of the communication between the Court and the Truth Labs. A document is also -8- NC: 2023:KHC-D:11432 CRL.P No. 102074 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 102077 of 2023, CRL.P No. 102079 of 2023 appended to the petition, which would feignly demonstrate that there is a reference to Truth Labs, but no such document is available on record. Therefore, when the documents are referred to Truth Labs is not forthcoming in the entire set of documents appended to the petition. It is on this score, the petitioners file their objections before the concerned court when the opinion of the Truth Labs emerged. The objections are not considered, and the matter was posted for orders. The Court, therefore, will have to direct the FSL Bangalore, which had been referred with certain set of documents to forthwith submit those documents. Therefore, the petitiosn could be disposed on the direction to the concerned Court to direct the FSL Bangalore to furnish its report's forthwith in the light of it being requisitioned on 7.9.2019 itself for an expert opinion of the documents (supra). On this ground, the petition deserves to succeed.
10. For the aforesaid reasons, the following ORDER i. The petitions are allowed in part. -9-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:11432 CRL.P No. 102074 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 102077 of 2023, CRL.P No. 102079 of 2023 ii. The order dated 04.08.2023 and 18.08.2023 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Haliyal, in CC Nos.183/2018, 182/2018 and 184/2018 are quashed.
iii. The matter is remitted back to the hands of the concerned court bearing in mind the observations made in the course of the order and direct FSL to forthwith submit its report in terms of the reference made on 18.09.2019.
[ iv. The Court shall endeavor to conclude the proceedings that are pending before it for the last 11 years within six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if not earlier.
v. All other contentions of both the parties shall be urged before the concerned Court.
Sd/-
JUDGE kmv ct:bck