MEVUL MANILAL NAGADA Vs. RUDRAPPA KAIBASAPPA YARADONI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner contends that prosecution launched against him for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not maintainable as the complainant has not obtained previous sanction contemplated in Section 84 (4 of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966. Section 84 is extracted below:

(2.) We have absolutely no doubt that the prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not a kind of dispute referred to in Ss. (1 of Section 84 of the Karnataka Act. Therefore, the previous sanction contemplated in Ss. (4 is not applicable to the prosecution proceedings for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. We, therefore, repel the contention of the petitioner and dismiss this special leave petition. court Masters