High Court Karnataka High Court

I N Venkatesh Gowda vs Maba Corporate Services Pvt Ltd on 10 September, 2009

Karnataka High Court
I N Venkatesh Gowda vs Maba Corporate Services Pvt Ltd on 10 September, 2009
Author: Subhash B.Adi
IN THE HIGH conar or' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY or SEPTEMBER 2009
BEFORE _ V _ it

THE HONBLE MR.JUS'I'iCE SUBHASH__B§AE:i5If: {T  E.

CRIMINAL PETXTION N1Q,4o12;2oo§"~;A:  ~
BETWEEN: I A S  i S 4'

I.N.Venkatesh Gowda

S/o 1.M.Ni1-vane Gowda

Aged 52 years

"indavara Exports" V -  

No.65/2, 11 Floor, Miller  ;

Benson Town  A     

Bangalore--560 046,  _    .     PETITIONER

{BY Sri.Kjran       " 
Sri.Chandrashel§ai-auE§., A_dvfs';~} _  _  V '

AND:  --------  N M

1\/{/ s. Maba Corporate   Ltd.
R/ by its Manager' 8; Power'o_f"Attorney
Holder D.A.Kiran  " V. 

No. 186 /.1 , J.c';c.orr.piex 

 , Annextzre l'--' Sirur 'P-a_rlg__'Rr)ad

Seshadrijziu ram

A"2_BaVngalore~456QVlG.2_0. .. RESPONDENT

=i==i=**#**>§=**=!=****

 .C'r"1'lrninal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

 praying"  set aside the order dt.6.7'.2009 in Crl.Appea}
 - No.53a9/2009 on the file of the Prl.City Civil & Sessions Judge,
 "P_Ies_idi_ng Officer, FTC-X, Bangalore.

This Petition coming on for admission this day, the Court

S  V' 'made the following:



O R D E R

Petitioner has sought for setting aside the order dated
6.7.2009 in Criminal Appeal No.539/2009 pending on of
Prl.CitY Civil <3: Sessions Judge, Bangalore. it in V V.

2. Petitioner is convicted for an i._in’delrV ‘ p.
Section 138 of the Negotiable instrunienits
SI. and fine of Rs.22 lakhs, inlldefanultllto
imprisonment. It isagainst has been
filed. Along with the appeal: 1-lags, been filed under
Section 389 of Cr;P:C. Learned
Sessions H ::p.v.gV’iisV(\§’1;~J/ltionary power pas
suspended “toV~deposit of 30% of the find

amount. ” S

3. Thelcffenvcellalllegedliis one punishable under Section 138

_of the «liglegotiablellInstruments Act and particularly when there is

Alfia. rnonetarypliability, the learned Sessions Judge taking into

consi’derat’io”r_iv..__th;e° circumstances has reasonably ordered for

by deposit of._’3’O%l’ of the fine amount. I do not find any reason to

S’ ” * grfi Witlfi the interlocutory order.

Accordingiy, this petitieri fails and same is dismissed.
However, time granted by the learned Sessions Judge is extended
by eight weeks from today.

Consequently, iVIisc.Cr1.3476/ 2009 it ‘

KNM/–