IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.305/2017 BETWEEN:
SRI GOPALAKRISHNA B.K. S/O KANTHAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT BANA HOUSE ARANTHODU VILLAGE & POST SULLIA TALUK D.K. – 574 314. …PETITIONER (BY SRI JEEVAN K., ADV.) AND:
SRI GUNAPALA K.
S/O LINGAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/O KANDKA HOUSE AMARMUDNOOR VILLAGE KUKKUJADKA POST SULLIA TALUK D.K. – 574 212. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI SHIVAPRASAD K.B., ADV.) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.09.2016 PASSED BY THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K., MANGALURU SITTING AT PUTTUR, D.K. IN CRL.A.NO.5016/2016 AND ALSO THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION DATED 11.02.2016 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., SULLIA, D.K. IN C.C.NO.1105/2014 AND TO DIRECT THE ACQUITTAL OF THE ACCUSED/PETITIONER.
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard on I.A.No.1/2017. Delay of 74 days in preferring the revision petition is condoned. Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2017 is allowed.
2. Both Counsel present and filed a joint application I.A.No.3/2017 under Section 147 of Negotiable Instruments Act, seeking permission to compound the offence. The application is accompanied by the affidavit of the respondent/complainant. Relevant averments in the affidavit at paras-1 to 8 read thus:
1. I say that I am the Complainant in C.C.No.1105/2014 on the file of Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Sullia, D.K.
2. I state that, in the above case the Accused/Revisional Petitioner convicted by the Hon’ble Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Sullia, D.K.
3. I state that, presently I had received the notice from the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka with regard to Criminal Revision Petition filed by the Accused/Criminal Revisional Petitioner.
4. I state that, the above case amicably through the intervention of well-wishers of both parties, settled for payment of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) by the Criminal Revisional Petitioner/Accused to the Complainant.
5. I state that, Accused/Criminal Revisional Petitioner, Gopalakrishna B.K. had paid the settled amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) and the same received by me.
6. I state that, I intend to file through my Advocate, Joint Compromise Petition U/Sec.147 of N.I.Act with regard to settlement of the Case between the parties amicably.
7. I state that, this Affidavit may also be considered along with Joint Compromise Petition filing U/Sec.147 of N.I.Act.
8. All these are true”.
In the light of the above, I.A.No.3/2017 is allowed.
The parties are permitted to compound the offence.
Consequently, the revision petition is allowed. The judgment of conviction and sentence recorded by the Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., at Sullia, D.K.District in C.C.No.1105/2014 dated 11.2.2016 affirmed in Criminal Appeal No.5016/2016 dated 17.9.2016 passed by the V Addl.District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru, sitting at Puttur, D.K.District, is set aside. The petitioner is acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the N.I.Act.
In view of the disposal of the main petition, I.A.No.2/2017 does not survive for consideration, hence, stands disposed of.
KNM/-
Sd/- JUDGE