Karnataka High Court
CRL.RP/663/2023 of THIMMEGOWDA, Vs H.S. ASHWATHNARAYANA. on 27 July 2026
CNR: KAHC010240422023 NC: 2026:KHC:38625 CRL.RP No. 663 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.663 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. THIMMEGOWDA, S/O KEMPANANJAIAH, NOW AGED ABOUT 47
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JULY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.663 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1.
THIMMEGOWDA,
S/O KEMPANANJAIAH,
NOW AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
R/O HULIKAL VILLAGE,
KASABA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK
TUMAKURUR DISTRICT-572221.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKARA K.A., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
H.S. ASHWATHNARAYANA,
S/O SIDDARAMAIAH,
NOW AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT HARIKARANAHALLY VILLAGE,
DANDINASHIVARA HOBLI,
TURUVEKERE TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572221.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. RAVI M.M., ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF
CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER
OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DATED 08.10.2021 PASSED
BY
THE
LEARNED
SENIOR
CIVIL
JUDGE
AND
JMFC,
TURUVEKERE IN C.C.NO.335/2017 AND CONFIRMED BY THE
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
LEARNED V ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TIPTUR
IN CRL.APPEAL NO.10024/2021 DATED 20.01.2023 AND
ACQUIT THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I. ACT.
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
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
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 matter is listed for admission. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.
2. Having perused the records, the complainant relies upon the documents at Exs.P.1 to 6(c). The cheque Ex.P.1 is admitted and signature is also admitted by the accused. The legal notice was served on the accused and no reply was given and P.W.1 was only cross-examined in part and nothing is elicited from the mouth of P.W.1 during the course of cross- examination made in part. No defence evidence is adduced before the Court and no probable defence is raised by the accused to disbelieve the case of the complainant and finding is given to that effect in paragraph Nos.18, 19 and 20. The Trial Court also taken note of the judgment of the Apex Court in the
HC-KAR
case of RANGAPPA v. MOHAN reported in (2010) 11 SCC 441 in paragraph No.19. When there is no rebuttal evidence, the Appellate Court also having re-assessed the material on record, comes to the conclusion that there is no any error on the part of the Trial Court in appreciating the evidence.
3. The main contention of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner before this Court is that both the Courts have committed an error and there was no any enforceable debt or liability to be discharged by the revision petitioner. To that effect, nothing is placed on record and there is no rebuttal evidence and also not made out any probable case against the complainant. When such being the case, I do not find any error on the part of the Trial Court and the Appellate Court in convicting and confirming the same and hence, the question of entertaining the revision petition does not arise.
4. Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23