Karnataka High Court
CRL.RP/1247/2024 of MR MOHAMMED NASIR Vs SMT D SARITHA on 29 July 2026
CNR: KAHC010586922024 NC: 2026:KHC:39497 CRL.RP No. 1247 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1247 OF 2024 BETWEEN: MR MOHAMMED NASIR S/O LATE ABDULLA, AGED ABOUT 43
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1247 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
MR MOHAMMED NASIR
S/O LATE ABDULLA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YERAS,
R/O DOOR NO.3325/57, 3RD CROSS
MAN.DI MOHALLA, MYSURU-570 015.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHRIDHARA K, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT D SARITHA
D/O LATE DODDAPANNA,
W/O SATHISH,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
T/O DOOR NO. 132, 1ST CROSS,
HOSA BEEDHI, KUMBARA KOPPAL
MYSURU-570 016.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. SATHEESH S,ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.438 R/W SEC.442 BNNS
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF
CONVICTION
PASSED
IN
C.C.NO.2009/2019
DATED
27.10.2023 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE
AND JMFC, MYSURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/ 138 OF NI ACT
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
AND ALSO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED
07.08.2024 PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.409/2023 ON THE FILE OF
THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT
MYSURU.
THIS PETITION, 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
This Court vide order dated 09.10.2024 suspended the sentence subject to depositing of 50% of the amount inclusive of the amount already deposited and this order is not complied by the revision petitioner.
2. Now the counsel appearing for revision petitioner would contend that the cheque issued by the revision petitioner is of State Bank of Mysuru and the same is invalid and the said bank was merged with State Bank of India.
3. But it is the specific case of the complainant that transaction was taken place between the complainant and accused in the year 2018 and the very revision petitioner has issued the cheque on 18.02.2019 i.e.,
HC-KAR
subsequent to the merger of bank with State Bank of India and now he cannot contend that the same is not valid. The revision petitioner himself given the cheque to the complainant on 18.02.2019 and counsel would submit that as per the Notification dated 02.05.2018 issued by Reserve Bank of India, the subject matter of the cheque is not valid. But when the revision petitioner issued the cheque on 18.02.2019 i.e., knowing fully well that he was aware of the merger of the State Bank of Mysuru with State Bank of India, he cannot take the technical stand before this Court. which was not raised before the trial Court, taken this ground in this revision for the first time, hence, in view of non-compliance of the conditional order, the revision petition is dismissed.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
SSD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16