M/S NITESH HOUSING DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. v. SRI. NITESH S
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) Criminal Petition is disposed. (ii) Proceedings in C.C.No.4560/2019 pending before the XXI Additional Court of Small Causes and ACJM at Bengaluru, stands quashed qua the petitioners. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE JY List No.: 4 Sl No.: 8
- Para 66. Accordingly, in view of the settlement, the present terms of criminal petition may be considered settlement arrived between Respondent No.1 and Petitioner No.1 and the complaint and proceedings in C.C.4560/2019 pending on the file of Learned XXI Additional Court of Small Cause and ACIM…
Judgment
#2. SRI. NITESH SHETTY S/O P.V. SHETTY AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT NO. 6A, NITESH MAYFAIR, 31, KASTURBA ROAD CROSS, NEAR BRITISH LIBRARY, BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:3212 CRL.P No. 5699 of 2025 HC-KAR
#3. SRI. L.S. VAIDYANATHAN S/O SRI. L.A. SAPTHARISHI AGED ABOUT 64 OCC DIRECTOR AT M/S. NITESH HOUSING DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., (NOW KNOWN AS NORTHROOF VENTURES PVT.LTD) REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO. 110, B WING ANDREWS BUILDING, LEVEL 1, M.G. ROAD BANGALORE - 500 001.
#4. SRI. S. ANANTHNARAYANAN S/O KOLLENGODE NARAYAN SUBRAMANIAN AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS OCC. DIRECTOR AT M/S NITESH HOUSING DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS NORTHROOF VENTURES PVT.LTD) HAVING OFFICE AT REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO. 110, B WING ANDREWS BUILDING, LEVEL 1 M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.
#5. SMT. DIPALI KHANNA W/O SRI. MOHAN KRISHEN KHANNA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS OCC: DIRECTOR AT M/S NITESH HOUSING DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., (NOW KNOWN AS NORTHROOF VENTURES PVT.LTD) HAVING OFFICE AT REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.110, B WING - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:3212 CRL.P No. 5699 of 2025 HC-KAR ANDREWS BUILDING, LEVEL 1 M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. (BY SRI. SIDDHARTH SUMAN, ADVOCATE) …PETITIONERS AND:
#1. M/S YES BANK LTD., WITH ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT YES BANK TOWER IFC 2, 15TH FLOOR, SENAPATI BAPAT MARG ELPHINSTONE (W), MUMBAI-400 013 REPRESENTED BY MR. SIDDHARTH NAINWAL AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS S/O DR.RAMESH CHANDRA NAINWAL.
#2. M/S JC FLOWERS ASSET RECONSTRUCTION LTD.. AN ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 3 OF THE SECURITISATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002 ACTING IN ITS CAPACITY AS JCF YES TRUST 2022-23 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT, CG HOUSE, 12TH FLOOR, DR. ANNIE BESANT ROAD, WORLI, MUMBAI - 400 030 REPRESENTED BY ITS SRI. S. MANIMARAN. S …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. POORNIMA HATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO 1) QUASH THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT AT ANNEXURE-A FILED BY THE RESPONDENT - BANK AND THE - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:3212 CRL.P No. 5699 of 2025 HC-KAR SUBSEQUENT AMENDED PRIVATE COMPLAINT AT ANNEXURE- A1 IN C.C.NO.4560/2019 WHICH IS NOW PENDING LEARNED XXI ADDL. COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND ACJM AT BENGALURU (SCCH-23) IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS ABOVE-NAMED ARE CONCERNED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri. Siddharth Suman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt. Poornima Hatti, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and have perused the material on record.
#2. During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties to the lis have settled the dispute among themselves and have filed a joint memo. The joint memo reads as follows: "JOINT MEMO
#1. The Petitioners has filed the present petition under Section 482 of CrPC for quashing the private complaint and the entire proceedings in C.C. No. 4560/2019 which is now pending before the Learned XXI Additional Court of Small Cause and ACJM at Bengaluru (SCCH-23). - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:3212 CRL.P No. 5699 of 2025 HC-KAR Instruments Act. The
#2. The Respondent no.1 had filed the private complaint against the Petitioners herein and another director alleging commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable complaint was subsequently amended and the original complainant was substituted by Respondent No.2, pursuant assignment agreement dated 16.12.2022, executed between Respondent No.2 and YES Bank Limited, wherein YES Bank Ltd assigned the financial assets, being the loan sanctioned to the Petitioner No.1 along with the rights, title, interest in the financing documents and the security created to secure the loan to the Respondent No.2. As per the terms of the assignment agreement and the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, Respondent No.2 is deemed to be the secured lender of the Petitioner No.1
#3. During the pendency of the instant proceedings, Respondent No.2 and Petitioner No.1 Company has entered into a settlement, vide Settlement Letters bearing reference JCFARC/HD/25-26/3416 and JCFARC/HD/25- 26/3418, both dated 04.08.2025 towards full and final settlement of the entire loan outstanding read with Letter ref. no. JCFARC/HD/25-26/3670 dated December 17, 2025 issued by the Respondent No.1 for reinstatement of Comprehensive Settlement, with extension of payment timeline upto December 31, 2025 (Settlement Letters"). Copies of the aforesaid Settlement letters are annexed herewith as Document No.1 (Colly). In terms of the aforesaid Settlement Letters, Petitioner No.1 company is liable to pay an amount of Rs.3,78,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crore Seventy-Eight Lakh Only) to Respondent No.2 towards full and final settlement of the entire loan outstanding. has made Petitioner No.1
#4. In compliance with the aforesaid Settlement Letters, Rs.3,78,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crore Seventy-Eight Lakh Only) to Respondent No.2 and Respondent No.2 hereby acknowledge receipt of the said payment towards full and final settlement of the entire loan outstanding and Respondent No.2 confirms that no amount is due and payable by Petitioner No.1 pursuant to receipt of the payment - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:3212 CRL.P No. 5699 of 2025 HC-KAR settlement amount, Respondeat No.2 confirms that Petitioners herein or other accused in C.C.4560/2019 are not liable to pay any amount to Respondent No.2
#5. In view of receipt of settlement amount by Respondent No.2, it is confirmed by Respondent No.2 that the entire loan outstanding of Petitioner No.1 stands discharged. Therefore, Respondent No.2 shall make requisite filings for withdrawal of the criminal proceedings initiated against the Petitioners herein and other accused in C.C.4560/2019.
#6. Accordingly, in view of the settlement, the present terms of criminal petition may be considered settlement arrived between Respondent No.1 and Petitioner No.1 and the complaint and proceedings in C.C.4560/2019 pending on the file of Learned XXI Additional Court of Small Cause and ACIM at Bengaluru (SCCH-23) is required to be quashed. Wherefore, it is most respectfully submitted and prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to consider this joint memo and recording the settlement arrived between the Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No.2, and accordingly pass necessary orders for quashing of the complaint and entire proceedings in C.C. 4560/2019 pending on the file of Learned XXI Additional Court of Small Cause and ACJM at Bengaluru (SCCH-23) may be quashed, in the interest of justice and equity.
#3. In the light of the settlement arrived at between the parties, I deem it appropriate to accept the joint memo and close the proceedings against the petitioners in the subject petition. - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:3212 CRL.P No. 5699 of 2025 HC-KAR
#4. The crime so registered against these petitioners as well as the charge sheet so filed pursuant to the crime in C.C.No.4560/2019 stands quashed.
#5. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) Criminal Petition is disposed. (ii) Proceedings in C.C.No.4560/2019 pending before the XXI Additional Court of Small Causes and ACJM at Bengaluru, stands quashed qua the petitioners. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE JY List No.: 4 Sl No.: 8
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528; Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Karnataka High Court, on 20 Jan 2026. The bench was M NAGAPRASANNA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.