Allowed

Smt. Bheemawwa W/O. Ramakrishna Kalliguddi v. Durgappa S/O. Ramappa Gasti

Karnataka HC1 Jun 2023CRL.A/100609/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a criminal appeal filed by the legal representatives of a deceased complainant. It set aside the Trial Court order abating the proceedings due to the complainant's death without prior cross-examination, permitted the legal heirs to come on record, and directed the Trial Court to proceed expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Appeal allowed; Trial Court order dated 19.11.2019 in CC No. 35/2018 set aside; Legal representatives permitted to prosecute.

Smt. Bheemawwa W/O. Ramakrishna Kalliguddi Vs Durgappa S/O. Ramappa Gasti — Karnataka HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 - CRL.A No. 100609 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶3

DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF JUNE, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANIL B KATTI

¶7

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100609 OF 2022 (-)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

DUNDAPPA S/O. HANAMAPPA CHIPPALAKATTI SINCE DECEASED BY HIS L.R’S,

¶10

1.(a) SMT. BHEEMAWWA W/O. RAMAKRISHNA KALLIGUDDI, AGE. 30 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. RAINAPUR, TQ. SAVADATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI - 587101.

¶11

1.(b) SMT. TEJSWINI W/O. RAGHU GULAGALJAMBAGI, AGE. 26 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. BUDNI K.D., TQ. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT - 587101.

¶12

J MAMATHA

¶13

1.(c) SANTOSH S/O. DUNDAPPA CHIPPALAKATTI, AGE. 23 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. ONTAGODI, TQ. MUDHOL,

¶14

Digitally signed by J MAMATHA Date: 2023.05.28 20:05:14 - 0700

¶15

DIST. BAGALKOT - 587101.

¶16

…APPELLANTS

¶17

(BY SRI. PAVAN B. DODDATTI, ADVOCATE)

¶18

AND:

¶19

DURGAPPA S/O. RAMAPPA GASTI, AGE. 56 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. LOKAPUR, TQ. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT - 587101.

¶20

…RESPONDENT

¶21

2 - CRL.A No. 100609 of 2022

¶22

(RESPONDENT SERVED)

¶23

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 378(4) OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO SET ASIDE ORDER DATED 19.11.2019 PASSED IN C.C. NO. 35/2018 BY THE COURT OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J M F C MUDHOL VIDE ANNEXURE-B , RESTORING THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS BY PERMITTING THE APPELLANTS TO COME ON RECORD AS LEGAL HEIRS OF THE DECEASED COMPLAINANT AND PURSUE THE MATTER.

¶24

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

Heard Sri.Pavan B Doddatti, learned counsel for the appellants.

¶27

I.A.No.3/2022 is filed under Section 302 R/w. Section 256(2) of Cr.P.C. seeking permission to come on record as legal representatives of deceased appellant-complainant and to prosecute the appeal.

¶28

In pursuance of the order of I Addl. District and Session Judge, Bagalkot, sitting at Jamakhandi in Crl.R.P.No.114/2020, dated 7.5.2022, legal representatives of the original complainant have been brought on record and the complaint was resorted to its original file.

¶29

The said order of I Addl. District and Session Judge, Bagalkot, sitting at Jamakhandi was assailed by accused before this Court in Crl.R.P.No.100306/2022. This Court, by order

¶30

3 - CRL.A No. 100609 of 2022

¶31

dated 9.11.2022 has set aside the order of I Addl. District and Session Judge, Bagalkot, sitting at Jamakhandi and liberty was granted to respondent/legal representatives of the complainant to file criminal appeal in terms of Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. Hence, under these circumstances, I.A.No.3/2022 is allowed. The Legal representatives of deceased appellant-complainant are permitted to come on record and to prosecute the appeal.

¶32

Complainant-Dundappa S/o Hanumappa Chippalakatti filed private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I.Act on the file of Prl. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Mudhol. After taking cognizance, process was issued against accused for the offence punishable

¶33

under Section 138 of N.I.Act and registered the case in CC.No.35/2018. The proceedings maintained by the Trial Court would go to show that on 2.11.2019, the matter was posted for cross examination of PW.1 finally and the same was adjourned on 19.11.2019. On the said date, the Trial Court observed that counsel for legal representatives of the complainant absent. The death of complainant was reported on 16.8.2019, since no steps were taken within three months, the complaint came to be dismissed as abated.

¶34

4 - CRL.A No. 100609 of 2022

¶35

The order sheet of the Trial Court would go to show that after appearance of accused, there was no appearance of accused before the Court and on two occasions, warrant was issued and it was recalled. Though complainant-PW.1 was present, there was no cross examination and recalling application came to be allowed. It is thereafter the complainant is reported to be dead. It means that accused has not shown any diligence in prosecuting the case when the matter was slated for cross examination of PW.1. When the matter was proceeded, half of the way and having no fault of legal heirs of complainant, complaint came to be dismissed as abated. Therefore, opportunity is required to be given to the legal representatives of complainant to prosecute the case initiated by deceased complainant. Consequently, proceed to pass the following:

¶36

ORDER

¶37

Appeal filed by legal representatives of the deceased complainant is hereby allowed.

¶38

The order of the Trial Court on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Mudhol in CC.No.35/2018, dated 19.11.2019 is hereby set aside.

¶39

5 - CRL.A No. 100609 of 2022

¶40

Legal representatives of complainant are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 3.7.2023 without there being any further notice.

¶41

The trial Court only to issue notice to accused and then proceed to dispose of the same in accordance with law as expeditious as possible.

¶42

(Sd/-) JUDGE

¶43

VB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14

Smt. Bheemawwa W/O. Ramakrishna Kalliguddi v. Durgappa S/O. Ramappa Gasti

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Bheemawwa W/O. Ramakrishna Kalliguddi v. Durgappa S/O. Ramappa Gasti

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

Shri. Kotrappa S/O. Yamunappa Kattimani Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Subhadra Vs Sri N Prasad S/O. Late Chennaveera Raju

Shri.Irranna @ Lokshekati Ningappa Goudar Vs the State of Karnataka

Gurunath Ningappa Khanderayar Vs Smt. Mallambike Alias Mallavva W/O Gurunath Khanderayar

Nagaraj S/O. Gangadhar Fattepur Vs Ratnakar S/O Ganapathi Hegade

Krishna Ganapu Naik Vs State of Karnataka