Dismissed

Mr.K.R. Sahasranam v. Mr. C. Harish Kumar

Karnataka HC19 Dec 2023CRL.A/522/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal under Section 378 CrPC against an acquittal order in a cheque dishonour case, the exonisation of the appeal since the appellant failed to appear despite multiple proceedings. The court rejected the application for special leave and dismissed the criminal appeal accordingly.

What did the court decide?

I.A. No.1/2019 rejected; Criminal Appeal No.522 of 2019 dismissed.

Mr.K.R. Sahasranam Vs Mr. C. Harish Kumar — Money Laundering | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:46215 CRL.A No. 522 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 522 OF 2019

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR.K.R. SAHASRANAM, S/O MR. RAMACHANDRAN, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, M/S PRIME GASES, HAVING OFFICE AT NO.645, 6TH MAIN, HAL III STAGE, BAGNALORE-75.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. A. YOGASHREE, ADVOCATE AND SRI. S. SIDDAPPAJI, ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

¶11

AND:

¶12

MR. C. HARISH KUMAR, S/O MR. M. CHENNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, Digitally PROPRIETOR, signed by M/S SRI DURGA GASES, SOWMYA D HAVING BUSINESS PLACE AT Location: B.B.ROAD, BETTAHALASOOR CROSS, High Court NEAR BANK OF INDIA ATM, of BANGALORE-562 157, Karnataka RESIDING AT NO.79, NEAR MILKY DIARY, CHIKKAJALA POST, BANGALORE NORTH, BANGALORE-562 157.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI. MANJUNATHA .B.R, ADVOCATE(ABSENT))

¶15

¶16

NC: 2023:KHC:46215 CRL.A No. 522 of 2019

¶17

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 15.02.2019 PASSED BY THE LVII ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.50805/2018 - ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I. ACT I.A.No.1/2019 IS FILED TO GRANT SPECIAL LEAVE TO INITIATE THE ANNEXED APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.02.2019 PASSED BY THE LVII ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU IN C.C. No.50805/2018 FOR THE REASONS STATED THEREIN.

¶18

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS ALONG WITH I.A.No.1/2019 THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The learned counsel for appellant is absent regularly.

¶21

I.A.No.1/2019 is filed seeking leave to

¶22

prosecute the matter. Though the matter is pending since 2019, there is no representation on behalf of appellant regularly.

¶23

On perusal of the judgment, it is evident that

¶24

the time barred debt is claimed by issuing subsequent notice. Hence, the learned Magistrate has come to a conclusion that the cheque was not issued to the amount

¶25

due and further, the claim is also barred by law of limitation. The learned counsel for appellant did not

¶26

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:46215 CRL.A No. 522 of 2019

¶27

appear to enlighten the Court as to how the judgment of the learned Magistrate is erroneous so as to grant the leave. Considering these aspects, I.A.No.1/2019 does not survive for consideration and accordingly, it stands rejected. Consequently, the appeal stands dismissed.

¶28

Sd/JUDGE

¶29

DS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

Mr.K.R. Sahasranam v. Mr. C. Harish Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.K.R. Sahasranam v. Mr. C. Harish Kumar

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

H C Karibasavaiah Vs v Nirmala

Sri Prakash T C Vs Sri Suresh K

Smt. Prema Vs Sri. Syed Mohammed

Sri. G K Girish Vs Smt. Sridevi Rao

Asif @ Ashasab Vs State Bharamasagara Police Station

Mr Syed Akram Vs the Union of India