Appellant sought leave to appeal against acquittal for a cheque dishonour offence under Section 138 NI Act. Counsel was repeatedly absent and office objections were never complied with despite multiple listings, so the court dismissed the appeal 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1952 OF 2021 (A)
BETWEEN:
B.C. THIMMAIAH S/O B.B. CHINNAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, REPRESENTED GPA HOLDER B.B CHINNAPPA R/O BELIGERI VILLAGE KAGGODLU POST MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU (DIST)
…APPELLANT
Digitally signed by NANDINI B G Location: high court of karnataka
(BY SRI. PRAKASH R.M., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))
AND:
MR. NARAYANA S/O SOMASHEKAR MAJOR IN AGE R/O BRAHAMINS VALLY HOUSE NO.14/2, MADIKERI
…RESPONDENT
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.03.2021 IN C.C.NO.947/2017 ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I. ACT AND CONVICT THE RESPONDENT AND AWARD COSTS OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.
THIS CRL.A, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for the appellant is absent. No representation even when the matter is passed over twice and again called at 2.38 pm.
The order sheet dated 04.09.2024 reads as under:
” Learned counsel for the appellant is absent. There is no representation.
The petition is of the year 2021.The matter is listed for third time for compliance of office objections. Inspite of that neither there is representation nor the office objections are complied with.
It appears the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal.
I do not find any reason to adjourn the matter. However, to afford a final opportunity, a week's time is granted to comply with the office objections.
List this matter after one week."
Inspite of that, there is no progress in the matter. The appeal is of the year 2021. The office objections are not complied with even though the matter is listed for 4th time. It
NC: 2024:KHC:44934 CRL.A No. 1952 of 2021
appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal.
Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of
office objections.
SD/(M G UMA) JUDGE
SPV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22
2 provisions across 2 enactments
B.C. Thimmaiah (represented by GPA holder B.B. Chinnappa)
Narayana
M G Uma
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
