In an appeal under Section 378(4) CrPC challenging convictions for cheque dishonour, the appellant was permitted to retire from the case. The court dismissed the appeal as the appellant was not interested in prosecuting the same.
The appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution after the appellant requests permission to retire from the case.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.973 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
SRI GANGADHAR K S S/O LATE N SHIVANNA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS PROPRIETOR OF BANGALORE EXCAVATORS HAVING OFFICE AT SHOP NO.8, NO.14, 1ST FLOOR, LAKSHMI BUILDING, ABOVE VIJAYA BANK, J.C.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 002
… COMPLAINANT/APPELLANT
(SRI. GANGADHAR K S - APPELLANT - ABSENT)
AND:
SMT LATHA R OLEKAR C/O SRI RAJKUMAR OLEKAR, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT NO.26, 9TH MAIN, 20TH CROSS, VIRAT NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 068
..ACCUSED/RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. VISHNU HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.02.2018 PASSED IN C.C.NO.11293/2017 & 11294/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, AT BENGALURU AND CONSEQUENTLY CONVICT THE
2
RESPONDENT / ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 AND 142 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT; B) AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ABOVE APPEAL TO MEET THE ENDS OF THE JUSTICE.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T
Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo seeking permission to retire from the case along with copy of the letter and acknowledgment for having served the notice of retirement.
In view of the same, learned counsel for the appellant is permitted to retire from the case.
It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and hence, appeal is dismissed for non prosecution.
Sd/-
JUDGE
MDS
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal filed under Section 378(4) CrPC should be decided on merits when the appellant abandons the case.
Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri Gangadhar K S
Smt Latha R Olekar
J.M. Khazi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
