High Court Karnataka High Court

Raviraj Shettigar vs Dts Raju S/O Fs Dharmaraj on 23 June, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Raviraj Shettigar vs Dts Raju S/O Fs Dharmaraj on 23 June, 2008
Author: Subhash B.Adi
{N THE HEGH COURT {BF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

GATED THE; THE 235% {)A'(' 0?: JUNE 2008, .. 

EEFORE

THE HO¥\j=fiLE zmmusncs SUBH$S.H:$;ADAi.:::  T T

CR¥M!NAL Rgvzsgon Pg_xfmo;éJT 'r¢35.lay--a, Nagasfiettihaiii
 .F2MVii$ta;ge.:+' 
 __.£5'§n g'aio;regV5$Ci' q9;§. 5. RES?-'ON9ENT

 & Assta. Advs.)

 Crimiaai Revéséen Peiiéécn Ea fiéed under Seczians 39?'{'%) and

 L'..j»..4L;~m) ems. praying to set aside the impugned order ét.2'i.2.200?'
* T ' passed by the Lower Appeiiate fiaurt and P.(3., F"¥"i;'-'sf, Eangaiore in
--  f3ri.A.N¢.16G9!2{}% at Am'1exure«-A and reverse the ordef of conviction

v  'grid the judgment dt,1.920{3$ passed by the xi! A.!a_i_r;t %.+f?¥:<:'l'é";"'::S§ve€§f§a£'§_ 'E3$' Vuf 

Neaatiabie instruments Ac: interaiia, aiéegitig §e!ific§:fiAe{“:’§%geraain “= ”

had issued three cheques dated’
for Rs$1,400;’–, Rs.1(3.0€30i- and $1.3-,§zo,3¢e;§’ ‘:*<-;s;f:;3;«.%ti~'s;éiy, The said
cheques weye returned p§t§§icner with an
endorsement 'fundg_E:asuffi;i.eenf'_.'–,§é i§€§;% re§'g':Va,.§é»§VV.'Efv}<§'V"§ssued a éegaé ncstise,
hcwmser, the said' §:'f:#5 §.:*;e f%stu:?§e' 3 a s1' :':':s o't'–V'r:§a§s.r.:%«ed. Based on the same,
he féieegzga §j{;§v§""%12:v§_;f::$e§2':Véézamined 21$ PW-33 am predussed
Ex:-:..P"§ id ?'3"§:"=,% %2§mse§f examined as SW»? and got
marked -.E;;*.fis5=,§¥::2§%§§facncu§e€$ for want of sufficiem funé arzd the ofémce

pafi»§.$é§abEe§§§§e% Sectierz 23% cf !\i.§«Act is prcvedw “flag iewer agpeiiate

Hcouzt oizygé-appieciatien of the evidence ?2e.Ed ihat me judgment of the

” §;é~a_§ c ?e_«:s;*% does 529*: mi; fey énterfeyence.

é, Leamed Ceunsei for the petitioner sabmitted téwat the

igangaciégn étsefi is :29′: proved. as the case of the respondem is that he

used ta s:.:;:m§y goods and zzefieet the chezzzzze, He pointed cut from the

f%

32-»

evidence 9? PW»-«E that, csmpiainant used “:0 coliact the sheque in
advance as against the supgiy ef goods and has animated that. he has
me documents ta show that he had auppfied the gaads, %–lg further
submitted that when the tzansaciéon is net proved, t¥’:e§’:’::,’:ia§ife$’t:%9n of
efieezce {grader Sectian 138 does net wise, Sesar3d!y.–.<!f2:e
notice is aisc not served on the pei§t§Q%'»%%!'..__ 'Ha§5éVi";i§é;¢5 '£$s;:t _"§;§c:r%_V$261.
evidence 5? SW-E that the aédyess Zézéjess-gt: §§';s§*{f:§§: [_§s j$é'r:<;2':9

address and when the notice %s"_r2'e.1;. served; it wiéé féxzitvccznstétute

efieeme under Sectéen '£38 !~§.§*Ast. i_§{{'i-¥3:%_*.~:~ ggaréi,' §%é;f e§éeV;£i cm the sway

E3-:,P?;2 and submés thatV£%2;é:"£{§'af._ mwer agasekate cczsrt

have %gr;e:'ed the e \_:§dersce…r.:.r§_ 's.e¢'9.mf._a:*é':iv.érr%Q;*:éou$%y cenvécted the
accused: é 'I

5:.:__Lea;;*né;dficgzazfiszai'éhe réspendent submitzed éhat, PW-$ {:9
mm: hag é$tia:%e::vt¥§;?.tf§'3:§e .–2,é§¢§£ic seflect chequea in csnneczian wézh

suppfg gs: gccdé, §;;§€V_§?:"theV'aavide;;ce he has séatecé that, ExsP€5, '$6, 1?

Rand'V:€"§.a§é'AV£?:é"b§§é beeéégfor having deéiazered the goods and svfiési: are

Ai3i3:£§»3TE?§§f¥&:§v;:£;§h$3{3: b5€..1:he pegsen in-charge of the canteen and these

éeci;-:r3f_:er2i;_s;: fémdagced befere the tréai court. fie further sufimitted

"»-w__ ':%2a5:, thé vfizétéca sent is the getétécaner is rammed as mt ciaémed, a

V :;fi%§'ef$;§:.E'f§',*}?§9¥'2 azéses under Sesiian 2? cf the Genera? Céaaases Act and

suifiamitéeé that {$35 psesumgeaicrs is required is be {emitted $14 the

' patitéenes 3y aéducésg necessary méense. He aiss szsbmiés that, the

natice £5 sergé ire coszesi aaciresfi and the gostmars has made an

(91%

..o- -.

endmsement as mt cfaimedg He aiso submitted that if the ngtise is not

seat to me correct address, the pastm:-an would act haveé:’-rzpjaeje an

enécxsement stating that it is rm: ciaérzaeci, instead,-“s;9.¥{:§*ui§*ihéa;e

stated that 21¢ such adcfyessee. Tfhe vegfy fa-2% t%’:’ai=ihas

made such an endcrsemant and thaf:__evid.er;é;e’-[is’ zz o7’t- §eE>}::.€:;te’ai,[_At%’:e

presumption arms in faazcur of the cgjompiainafit £1i”E€§C:i”‘;”:i:;3,*(,+fl§vi9{‘a éf £59

Generaé Ciauses Act

ea PW-3 in his eusaenge he ased to coiiaczt the
cheque for the suppiyvof th§:”‘g?1’3 0t§§.= iafmji»L,hé.é.h’aé§:$V§$$ staied mat, he ha$
so document fqg’ §z_fg4.4V€:if;-:,§”é§{i’é5e7′;’:ce, he has stated ihat
Exs,P’!5i 15. £3 :%3j%&;%g:§é §§Lkké%re«L éoaxs, which am; that me
gaofis wz§ § d;v«.%:*”A§§A*.,?se3j:”.:=;«;d_’§v}n#:*zVr.,’–§ a§:!v.Vif’%*;e,-s;_§.a bjééég have been signed eiiéaer $32 the
mtétierset :55: *i:?V:e’*-..:.,e:.é”§;;::§z7;rei;’»s{_;” were them in ‘me canéeer: at the time

of saapgiga, Thé$e.,:daci;’*mé§§tsé.’$$ pwve the guppiy cf goads. Farmer,

‘mereéffnesause. the ‘§5ét’§ts’é:rzer has staéed that, he used is aoééect the

V”‘.;t,%_i2f:efq;a;;:=e’:’3rf:;1’s’x§.§_s;T:; when PW»? En his ezxééerme baa pmduceci the

:3;cume::?:§”,’«;r:sth§ng esntaary izag men aiieézeé by the setitmrger. Er:

V.7a§dd:%€ié’§-ma this. same sf the cérsumatarsaes», *«@;%:§ch are zequized ta ha

‘-«[A’;mA5:;’g:e§d’Aare. shegues are cf September – ficécber 2003 whereas’ the

“~ uré5t’§ce is ésgueé Er: Secember 2093. if reafiy the she-was are ésaued as

u A againat the amply af goeésg in the mama; ceurse sf business, there

shouié ham been demand by éha petitioner fa; wppiy of gems or in

case there is no szgppéy, them wouid be demand for ietpiga of the
change. SW-‘§ has net stated. as to why demand was far

sugapiy sf gocds, as to why ‘the cheques were tying for?:€?§§9é’e”>;$:’:§%”;t%etia_.$3-‘éih

the responderzt and why he has not Enfcrmed the.£Ea»n4$<:j§9%"é§éo§&p%nQ' *':he V-

payment, if reafiy gecds wage not su;:::'piie:;c '. :.F:!'Q3'¥;!'._'.§§"?é'€'§é'§{¥_é%'§$€!:'0¥"§'l.

record' ét cieafiy shevzez shat t?::ee ::%!'1_§quéS–sr_.e'*é;*-e iasgéé §§é£iéi§§ée{
and they were dishoncureé far waéffis»:afficé§%:t~fuéfidjhéngvéiréwéiéés iegayéf,
netéca was issued. fine in.%5s§a_§._;3res'u'%é?%;i$§§§fr:;'f§ gm-dé er S:e:¢tibr% $39 $5 proved
by the reswnéent. Far thea':*éb£;§ii§;.ézide%§§é.;_'.;$5»§"_.aetitioner has reiéed
omy on the sizgy..§s;§:e'§e:x;;§V§%2'fie.::Vé§;§s§§x$r:%Er:ai§on cf PW'-'E that,
aézeqzsas war? of geeds, but that is 3:50
ciarified "i:ee'§%és cieariy $%zs%:: the suppéy cf
goada. §:E;.Av§e~:§z cf' "rs-:~co:d, 3 find no: reassr: is énteifere

with the §ndii*2g_s"¢§ iféé _::.§5'2§rtsw ow.

V’ _ ficsiardéagiy, :Eie £”«?’:e%:§s§an faiis and game Es éismésseé.

Sd/-

Judge

  '    %  " ~ L V"V;-{'wz«