High Court Karnataka High Court

P S Nagendra Babu vs V Jagannatha Shetty @ Jagannath on 1 September, 2009

Karnataka High Court
P S Nagendra Babu vs V Jagannatha Shetty @ Jagannath on 1 September, 2009
Author: Arali Nagaraj
E

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE W DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2009
BEFORE 4 it  A."
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ARALI   _ 
CRIMINAL      it
BETWEEN:   A    2 2

P S Nagendra Babu,

S / O.P. Sathyanarayanaiah,

Aged about 43 years, .   :

R/a.Vijayalakshmi Nilaya', _   A

Behind Dharmachathra Readf' 'V 

Chikkaballapura'TOw"nv-,"" --  "  L  

ChikkabalIapura:;.VpppZ"        APPELLANT

[By Sri:v'Nafayar1_a  8: ,'.lASSVOciates)

V. Jagannatha VShett3Af".@V agannath,

_, _ S / O (' enkatachalavpatlfii,
. "'Maf1agii--1"g Partner, """ H
":2 S1ji'V_aiah'n and 'Enterprises,
A Nt)vL.79}' 2}' 11* O'rOSs,

l\/iagadi RO-ad,p'BangalOre. . . RESPONDENT

flv[By Raghavendra Rao, Adv.)

it Crl. Appeal is filed under Section 378(4) Cr.PC

A..”pJ;”a3,’i;rig to Set aside the impugned dated 12.12.2008 in CC
NO.405/2006 On the file Of the learned Principal Civil Judge
A ~{J–r. Dn.) 8: JMF C, Chikaballapura by allowing this appeal,

__»»-..i:””‘-e-\_._._..

consequently convict the accused/respondent for the offence
p/u/s.I38 of NI Act and punish him by passing proper
sentence and award compensation to the appellant as per
Sec. 1 1′? of NI Act in accordance with law.

This Crl. Appeal coming on for Admission the
Court delivered the following: * » — =

JUoGMs,:f”d

This appeal is by the J

on the file of the learned Dn’.)’&
JMF C, Chikkaballapur.lhererinafter”‘-referred-..to~’gas the ‘Trial
Court’ for short) againstlthed’ order of acquittal

dated Icase acquitting the

accused’ofthe_offence’*»tii3.der_wSectior1 188 of the Negotiable
Instrurnents referred to as the ‘NI Act’ for

short) .. _

2.6-Tl1ongh«.,:ti1i_s appeal is listed today for admission, it is

talsienfodr’ iiiialcI=.d’isposa1 by consent of the learned counsels for

‘.Vboth4d”the’ sides and their arguments on merits are heard.

–*

7
established by the complainant. I do not find any reasons to

take a View different from the {me taken by the T rial Court.
For the reasons aforesaid, the prese1f1t._’:”‘appeal is

dismissed as being devoid of merits.

t t}UDGEfig

Bkm.