IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8054/2014 Between:
Sri.G.N.Narayanaswamy S/o Narayanappa, Aged about 67 years Proprietor, Hema Electricals and Electric Contractor, Gaddekannur Village, Tamaka Post, Kasaba Hobli, Kolar Taluk and District – 563101. … Petitioner (By Sri.Muniswamy Gowda S.G., Advocate) And:
Sri.T.Sanath Kumar, S/o Thirmalachari, Aged about 54 years Electric Contractor, Cholaghatta Village, Madderi Post, Kolar Taluk and District – 563106. ...Respondent (Notice is dispensed with v/o/d 20.03.2019) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to quash the order dated 22.11.2014 in unnumbered case on the file of the XXI ACMM, Bengaluru City in C.C.No.340/12 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Kolar and thereby direction the XXI ACMM, to receive the complaint in C.C.No.340/12 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Kolar and to proceed further.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Having regard to the grounds urged in the petition and having regard to the relief claimed in the petition, notice to respondent is dispensed with.
3. The complaint filed by the petitioner herein under Section 138 of N.I Act was ordered to be returned for presentation before the proper Court. The said order was passed on 22.08.2014, whereunder the complainant was directed to re-present or re-file the complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate within 30 days from the date of return of complaint. Endorsement made on the complaint reads that the said complaint was returned to the complainant for representation before the jurisdictional Court only on 28.10.2014 and the same was presented before the XXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru on 22.11.2014 within 30 days as ordered by the trial Court.
4. However, without considering the said fact, the learned Magistrate has refused to receive the complaint on the ground that the presentation is delayed beyond 30 days. The said observation is contrary to the material on record. Impugned order therefore cannot be sustained.
Accordingly, petition is allowed. Order dated 22.11.2014 passed by the XXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru is quashed.
The learned Magistrate is directed to receive the complaint and proceed in the matter in accordance with law.
SD/-
JUDGE NBM