Allowed

Mr Ravi Kumar B v. Mr Bikaram G

Karnataka HC1 Dec 2016CRL.A/818/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court allowed a criminal appeal filed against the dismissal of a cheque bounce complaint for non-prosecution. The court condoned the delay in filing the appeal, attributing it to the transfer of the presiding officer rather than complainant's indolence. The complaint was restored to the lower court file for fresh proceedings on the merits.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed, the order dismissing the complaint for non-prosecution was quashed, and the complaint was restored to the lower court file for fresh proceedings. The complainant was directed t

Mr Ravi Kumar B Vs Mr Bikaram G — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 01^ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2016

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.818 OF 2016

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Mr. Ravi Kumar B., Son of Basavaraj S., Aged about 35 years, Residing at No.06, Arakere Ramaswamy Layout, Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore – 560 076. …APPELLANT (By Shri Subhash Reddy V., Advocate)

¶9

AND:

¶10

Mr. Bikaram G., Son of Late Geegaram, Aged about 57 years, Prop: M/s Aai Matha Jewellers, No.549/1, Gottigere, Near Bus Stop, Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore – 560 083.

…RESPONDENT

(respondent served)

This Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378(4) of the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the advocate for the appellant praying to set aside the judgment and order dated 30.9.2015 passed by the XVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore in C.C.No.5747/2014 – acquitting the respondent/accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I.Act.

¶16

This appeal coming on for Further Orders this day, the Court delivered the following:

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The respondent having been served, remains absent.

¶19

Therefore, the application I.A.2/2016 for condonation of delay

¶20

is allowed. The appeal is considered on merits, having regard to the fact that the complainant is in appeal before this court on

¶21

the ground that the complaint has been dismissed for nonprosecution.

¶22

From the order-sheet, it is noticed that it cannot be said

¶23

that there was want of diligence on the part of the complainant

¶24

from the date summons was issued to the accused and he had entered appearance and also entered his plea. Thereafter, the

¶25

¶26

Presiding Officer of the court possibly having been transferred, the matter was hanging without any further progress and it is noticed that the complainant had remained absent on 29.07.2015 and the case had been adjourned to 28.08.2015 on which date, the Presiding Officer was transferred and the case was adjourned to 30.09.2015 and on the said date, the new incumbent, in his enthusiasm, has noticed that the complainant has remained absent when the matter was kept by and the matter having been repeatedly called out throughout the day,

¶27

and has hence finally dismissed the complaint for nonprosecution.

¶28

It would appear that the complainant could have been given one more chance after the Presiding Officer was transferred. The complainant or the counsel may have been under the impression that the court was vacant possibly and have allowed the matter to go by default.

¶29

¶30

Therefore, even though the order of the court below cannot be faulted in proceeding according to book, in dismissing the complaint for non-prosecution, as it is noticed that the complainant was not totally indolent over a period of time and he has chartered the complaint from March 2014 to be ultimately dismissed for default on 30.09.2015. It may result in a miscarriage of justice insofar as the complainant is concerned. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The complaint is restored to file. The complainant shall appear before the court below without any further notice, on 19.12.2016.

¶31

Sd/- JUDGE

¶32

Mr Ravi Kumar B v. Mr Bikaram G

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Ravi Kumar B v. Mr Bikaram G

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammed Vs Stateof Karnataka

Sri R Sekar Vs State of Karnataka

U. Varadaraya Nayak Vs State of Karnataka

Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd. Vs Mr H Rajappa

Reshma Baig Vs M/S. A1-TAIYABA Tours and Travels

Sri Jagadish Mirle Vs the State of Karnataka