Dismissed

Sri Boralingegowda B K v. Sri Lokesh G R

Karnataka HC23 Jun 2022CRL.RP/1181/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka through a video conference adjudicated a Criminal Revision Petition. The petitioner failed to comply with office objections despite being given at least four opportunities. The court dismissed the petition for non-cooperation, noting the petitioner's lack of interest in prosecuting the matter himself.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Revision Petition was dismissed for non-compliance of office objections.

Sri Boralingegowda B K Vs Sri Lokesh G R — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

¶5

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.1181 OF 2019

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI BORALINGEGOWDA B K S/O KRISHNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS RESIDING AT NAGARAJA BUILDING S.R. STICH WARE, BEHIND BEST SCHOOL CHOWDESHWARINAGARA MAIN ROAD BESIDE RANGANATHA MINERAL WATER LAVAKUSHA NAGARA, L.G.R. LAY OUT LAGGERE, BANGALORE - 560 058.

¶8

… PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. SREENIVAS R, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

SRI LOKESH G R S/O RANGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT SIDDALINGAREDDY BUILDING KONAPPANA AGRAHARA G.S. PALYA, ELECTRONIC CITY POST BANGALORE - 560 100.

¶12

… RESPONDENT

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT

¶14

Crl.R.P.No.1181/2019 2

¶15

DATED 01.08.2017, PASSED BY THE XIX A.C.M.M., AT BANGALORE CITY IN C.C.NO.16123/2016 AND ACQUIT THE APPELLANT FOR THE CHARGE UNDER SECTION 138 OF THE N.I. ACT AND TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.03.2018 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE CCH-57, BANGALORE, AND TO REMAND THE MATTER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION.

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner appearing through video conference submits that the party is not co-operating in complying office objections.

¶19

It is also observed that several and sufficient opportunities of not less then four times has already been granted to comply the office objections. Since the learned counsel for the petitioner himself pleads his helplessness in complying the office objections, this goes to show that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter.

¶20

¶21

Hence, the Revision Petition stands dismissed for non-compliance of office objections.

¶22

In view of disposal of the main petition, pending I.A.No.1/2018 does not survive for consideration.

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

Sri Boralingegowda B K v. Sri Lokesh G R

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Boralingegowda B K v. Sri Lokesh G R

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

Smt Bhuvaneshwari Vs Sri Vishwanatha G

Bharathi Dinesh Poojary Vs Anil a v

Chandrashekhar Vs Harish S Karkera

Smt G S Sumithra Vs Sri H Narayana Rao

Kullegowda Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Nisha Vs State by Vijayanagara Police