w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



M/s. Malathi Roller Flour Mills, Rep. by its Partner S.S. Kailash, Bengaluru v/s Venkateshwara Stores, Bengaluru, Rep. by its Partner K.R. Dhanpal

    Criminal Appeal No. 1359 of 2017

    Decided On, 16 December 2021

    At, High Court of Karnataka

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. SOMASHEKAR

    For the Petitioner: C. Praveen, Advocate. For the Respondent: Keerthana Nagaraj, Advocate.



Judgment Text

(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal filed under Sec.378(4) of Criminal Procedure Code, by the Advocate for the appellant praying to set aside the order of acquittal dated 28.06.2017 in C.C.No.547/2003 passed by the XLII-ACMM at Bangalore, convict the respondent.)

1. None appear for the appellant either through video conferencing or present before the Court physically. But counsel namely Ms.Keerthana Nagaraj for the respondent is present before the Court physically and representing counsel namely K.V.Thimmaiah for respondent who is on record. Respondent namely K.R.Dhanpal is also present before the Court physically.

2. Whereas under this appeal challenging the acquittal judgment rendered by the trial Court in C.C.No.547/2003 dated 28.06.2017 whereby ended in acquittal of the offence under Section 138 of N.I.Act which is incorporated in the operative portion of the order. Even though this appeal is slated for admission but there is no representation for the appellant.

3. In the meanwhile of giving dictation by referring the impugned judgment of acquittal rendered by the trial Court in C.C.No.547/2003, counsel for respondent / accused has produced memo along with copies of the documents pertaining to the settlement entered into between the parties and so also, the order sheet maintained by the trial Court in C.C.No.13308/2003 on the file of II Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City for the purpose of perusal. Whereas in the order sheet it reveals as "case is called out for compromise before Lok - Adalath. Complainant and Accused and their respective counsels are present. On being questioned, both parties submitted that, they have compromised the case and closed the case. The alleged offence is u/s 138 of NI Act. Same is compoundable in nature. The complainant is agreed to close the case. Hence, compromise is recorded and proceeded to pass the order. Acting under Section 320(8) of Cr.P.C. accused is hereby acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act."

4. In the aforesaid case in C.C.No.13308/2003 complainant namely K.R.Dhanpal being the partner of M/s. Venkateshwara Stores and accused namely Mrs.S.S.Pankaja filed an application under Section 147 of N.I.Act r/w Section 320 of Cr.P.C. Whereas in para-3 of the application it is stated that "parties further state that Mr.K.R.Dhanpal (who is the partner of the complainant) had also filed another complaint in C.C.No.13929/2005 which was pending consideration on the file of the learned XXIII Addl.SCJ & XXI Addl.CMM, Bengaluru against the husband of accused Mr.S.M.Sathyanarayana, which complaint was dismissed vide judgment of acquittal dated 23.09.2015 which judgment of acquittal was challenged by the complainant in Crl.A.No.1339/2015 pending consideration on the file of High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru."

5. In para - 4 of the said application, it is stated that M/s.Malathi Roller Flour Mills, for which the accused is also a partner had also filed another complaint in C.C.No.547/2003 which was pending consideration on the file of XLII Addl.CMM, Benglauru, against the complainant M/s.Venkateshwara Stores, which complaint was dismissed vide judgment of acquittal dated 28.06.2017 which judgment of acquittal was challenged by M/s.Malathi Roller Flour Mills in Crl.A.No.1359/2017 pending on the file of High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru."

6. In para - 7 it is stated that "both the parties state that the respective parties would make appropriate arrangements to get the Criminal Appeals in Crl.A.No.1339/2015 and Crl.A.No.1359/2017 disposed off in accordance with the settlements arrived at, before the High Court of Karnataka by filing necessary applications immediately forthwith."

7. Whereas in this compromise application both the complainant and accused have subscribed their signature and their respective advocates. However, under this appeal challenging the acquittal judgment rendered by the trial Court by urging various grounds. The complainant and accused have arrived at a compromise by filing application under Section 147 of N.I.Act r/w Section 320 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, it is deemed appropriate to state that when the mat

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

ter has ended in compromise, it is not proper for continuity of this appeal and even at the stage of admission, the matter is taken up for disposal. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER Appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission as where the matter has ended compromise between the parties. Consequently, the acquittal judgment rendered by the trial Court in C.C.No.547/2003 dated 28.06.2017 hereby confirmed.
O R