MRS. KEERTHI KIRAN, vs MRS. JACINTHA PHILOMINA VIVIAN PEREIRE, Advocate - AJAY PRABHU M — CRL.RP/538/2026

Case under The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 09th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: KAHC010225262026

Filing Number

CRL.RP/519/2026

Filing Date

25-Mar-2026

Registration No

CRL.RP/538/2026

Registration Date

27-Mar-2026

Judge

H.p.sandesh

Coram

H.p.sandesh

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRL.RP ( 114 )

Sub-Category

397(Cr.PC) / 438(BNSS)-U/S 397/-U/S 438 ( 11 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

09-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MRS. KEERTHI KIRAN,

    Adv. KISHORE KUMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MRS. JACINTHA PHILOMINA VIVIAN PEREIRE, Advocate - AJAY PRABHU M

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Jun-2026

    H.p.sandeshView PDF

    Case Summary: CRL.RP No. 538/2026 Decision: The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the revision petition filed by Mrs. Keerthi Kiran, upholding the concurrent conviction of both lower courts under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Key Facts & Reasoning: Kiran (dentist) received Rs. 42,85,362 as investment from the complainant for her dental clinic with promised 40% profit-sharing. After years of no profit distribution and the complainant's husband's death, an agreement was executed acknowledging the liability, followed by bounced cheques. The court rejected Kiran's argument that this was merely an investment without legal liability, holding that once liability was acknowledged through the written agreement and cheques were issued, she cannot deny legal obligation under Section 138 NI Act, regardless of the investment's underlying nature. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Jun-2026

    Admission

    V Srishananda

  4. 06-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 25-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRL.RP/538/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRL.RP No. 538/2026 Decision: The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the revision petition filed by Mrs. Keerthi Kiran, upholding the concurrent conviction of both lower courts under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Key Facts & Reasoning: Kiran (dentist) received Rs. 42,85,362 as investment from the complainant for her dental clinic with promised 40% profit-sharing. After years of no profit distribution and the complainant's husband's death, an agreement was executed acknowledging the liability, followed by bounced cheques. The court rejected Kiran's argument that this was merely an investment without legal liability, holding that once liability was acknowledged through the written agreement and cheques were issued, she cannot deny legal obligation under Section 138 NI Act, regardless of the investment's underlying nature. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case