The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a Criminal Revision Petition under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. for non-prosecution. The petitioner's counsel was repeatedly absent, grounds for adjournment were not made out, and the petitioner had earlier refused mediation participation.
The petition was dismissed for non-prosecution.
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 18TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.28/2020
BETWEEN:
SMT. ROOPA SHASTRY @ RASHMI, W/O UMESH L. SHASTRY, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT FLAT NO.D3, RAJASADAN APARTMENT, GATTIGERE MAIN RAOD, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR, BENGALURU.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI HARISH SHIRLAKOPPA, PROXY ADVOCATE FOR SRI PRAVEENA KUMARA NIRVANI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI B.S. VISHWANATH, S/O LATE B. SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.571, ADVAITHA, 15TH MAIN, 10TH CROSS, PADMANABHANAGAR, BENGALURU-70. ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI PRADEEP NAIK K, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 397 READ WITH 401 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 26.11.2019 PASSED BY THE LXIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU IN CRL.A.NO.1552/2018 AND ORDER DATED 18.07.2018
2
PASSED BY THE VI ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXXI A.C.M.M., IN C.C.NO.15614/2017 AND CONSEQUENTLY ACQUIT THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF THE N.I ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
This matter is of the year 2020 and this Court granted interim order on 10.01.2020 subject to depositing of 40% of the fine amount inclusive of the amount, if any, already deposited before the Trial Court within a period of four weeks. On 28.02.2020 and 18.03.2020, the learned counsel for the petitioner was absent. This Court vide order dated 29.01.2021, referred the matter for mediation at the instance of the petitioner and now this Court has received the intimation from the Mediation Centre that the petitioner refused to participate in the mediation proceedings. This matter was listed on 22.03.2022 and on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the junior counsel took time on the ground that Senior Counsel is not keeping well and this Court ordered to list the matter on 30.03.2022. On 30.03.2022, again the learned counsel for the petitioner was absent. However, this Court gave an opportunity to pursue the matter and specific order was
3
passed that the petition will be dismissed for non-prosecution if the petitioner fails to prosecute the matter.
Sd/JUDGE
MD
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Criminal Revision Petition should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to absence of counsel and lack of substantive grounds.
Whether the petitioner's refusal to participate in mediation and subsequent neglect of the matter warrants dismissal under Cr.P.C. 397 read with 401.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Roopa Shastry @ Rashmi
Sri B.S. Vishwanath
H.P. Sandesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
