Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/8194/2020 of SMT. LEELA H.K. @ LEELAVATHI PRAKASH Vs M/S SRI AMBE FILMS on 5 October 2026
CNR: KAHC010411342020 NC: 2026:KHC:55259 CRL.P No. 8170 of 2020 C/W CRL.P No. 8194 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8170 OF 2020 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8194 OF 2020 IN
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8170 OF 2020
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8194 OF 2020
IN CRL.P No.8170/2020:
BETWEEN:
1.
SMT. LEELA H.K. @ LEELAVATHI PRAKASH,
W/O. N. PRAKASH,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
PARTNER,
CAUVERY CONCRETE PRODUCTS,
NO.483, RESIDENCE NO.9,
3RD FLOOR, PENT HOUSE,
SAHAKARANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 092.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MANOHAR G., ADVOCATE - ABSENT)
AND:
1.
M/S. SRI AMBE FILMS,
NO.81, ‘B’ STREET,
ANAND RAO EXTENSION,
BENGALURU-560009,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR,
MR. CHANDRAKANTH V. MEHTA,
S/O. VELJEE S. MEHTA,
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. GIRISH D.S., ADVOCATE - ABSENT)
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL
PROCEEDINGS
IN
PCR
NO.4692/2019
SUBSEQUENTLY
RENUMBERED AS C.C.NO.10464/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE
LEARNED
XXI
AADDITIONAL
CHIEF
METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU, AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR
THE ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF
THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT 1881 VIDE ANNEXURE-A.
IN CRL.P NO.8194/2020:
BETWEEN:
1.
SMT. LEELA H.K. @ LEELAVATHI PRAKASH,
W/O N. PRAKASH,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
PARTNER,
CAUVERY CONCRETE PRODUCTS,
NO.483, RESIDENCE NO.9,
3RD FLOOR, PENT HOUSE,
SAHAKARANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560092.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MANOHAR G., ADVOCATE - ABSENT)
AND:
1.
M/S. SRI AMBE FILMS,
NO.81, ‘B’ STREET,
ANAND RAO EXTENSION,
BENGALURU-560009,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR,
MR. CHANDRAKANTH V. MEHTA,
S/O VELJEE S. MEHTA,
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. GIRISH D.S., ADVOCATE - ABSENT)
HC-KAR
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE ORDER AND
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER, AT ANNEXURE-B DATED
04.01.2020 PASSED ON THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION
143(A) OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, BY THE XXI
ADDITIONAL
CHIEF
METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE
AT
BENGALURU,
AGAINST
THE
PETITIONER
IN
C.C.NO.10464/2019.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
The learned counsel for the petitioner is absent.
2. This petition is filed praying this Court to quash the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Trial Court took the cognizance after having examined the complainant and the order passed by the Trial Court is very clear that the complainant was examined and documents at Exs.P1 to P8 are marked. The Trial Court while taking the cognizance, taken note of the contents of the complaint and also the sworn statement and relied upon the documents of Exs.P1 to P8 and issued the summons. Inspite of these petitions were filed in 2020, after lapse of six years also the learned counsel for the petitioner is not pursuing the matter.
HC-KAR
When the Trial Court examined the complainant and considered the contents of the complaint and also the documents which have been marked, while issuing the summons against the petitioner, this Court cannot find any fault with the order passed by the Trial Court in both the petitions. The cognizance was taken considering the material on record and hence, no ground is made out to quash the proceedings. The grounds which have been urged can be considered while considering the matter on merits and not at this stage. Hence, both the petitions are dismissed.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33