CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Mr. Parchuri Surendra Kumar vs M/s. Haigreeva Infra Tech Projects Ltd.

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 2 August 2013 · Citation: (2013) 08 KAR CK 0166

HON’BLE JUDGES
K.N. Keshavanarayana, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 200 · Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI) — Section 138, 143, 147
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Petition No. 4636 of 2013
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 389 words

K.N. Keshavanarayana, J.—The prosecution initiated by the respondent against the petitioner for the offence punishable u/s 138 of the N.I. Act, is sought to be quashed inter alia on the ground that the procedure adopted by the learned Magistrate in accepting the affidavit filed by the complainant as sworn statement is contrary to law and the decisions of this Court. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, I find no substance in this contention.

2.

The question as to whether in a prosecution u/s 138 of the N.I. Act, the Magistrate could record the sworn statement by way of affidavit was referred to a Division Bench for its opinion in Crl. P. No. 2604/12. The point referred to the Divisional Bench was to the following effect.

Having regard to the amendment to the 1881 Act, brought about by the amending Act 55/2002, and the statement of objections and reasons thereto, with effect from 6.2.2003, whereby Sections 143 to 147 are inserted, whether the recording of a sworn statement by the Magistrate as required u/s 200 Cr. P.C. in proceedings instituted for an offence punishable u/s 138 of the 1881 Act would be mandatory and whether the same could either be dispensed with or an affidavit be received in lieu of a sworn statement?

3.

After considering the objects and reasons for amendment and also the purpose of amendment brought to N.I. Act by Act 55/2002, the Division Bench has answered the said question as under:

Having regard to the amendment to the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Act, brought about by the amending Act 55/2002, and the statement of objects and reasons thereto, with effect from 6.2.2013, whereby Sections 143 to 147 are inserted, recording of a sworn statement by the Magistrate as required u/s 200 Cr. P.C. is not mandatory in respect of the proceedings instituted for an offence punishable u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The recording prima facie the sworn statement may be dispensed with and the affidavit may be received in lieu of a sworn statement.

In the light of the above, the procedure adopted by the learned Magistrate in accepting the affidavit of the complainant as sworn statement cannot be held as contrary to law.

In this view of the matter, there is no merit in this petition. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.