Allowed

M/S Guru Fab v. G P Steel

Karnataka HC12 Dec 2024CRL.P/2238/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Section 138 NI Act complaint dismissed for non-prosecution under Section 203 Cr.P.C. was challenged in a quash petition. The High Court restored the complaint to file, granting the complainant one opportunity to appear and cooperate with proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Complaint restored to file; petitioner to appear before the trial court and cooperate; liberty given to trial court if further default occurs.

M/S Guru Fab Vs G P Steel — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:51295 CRL.P No. 2238 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2238 OF 2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M/S GURU FAB NO.60/2, BYRAVESHWARANAGAR, THAMANAHALLI, NEAR ACHARYA COLLAGE, ACHUTHANAGAR POST, BANGALORE - 560 107 REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI SURESH T H S/O LATE HANUMAIAH

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. PRAVEENA KUMARA NIRVANI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

G P STEEL BILAL MASJID ROAD, HIRIYUR, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI PYARU BAI.

¶14

…RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.09.2022 PASSED BY THE XX ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE IN P.C.R.NO. 6977/2022. CONSEQUENTLY, PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO TAKE A STEPS TO PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT IN P.C.R.NO.6977/2020.

¶15

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:51295 CRL.P No. 2238 of 2023

¶18

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the order of the concerned Court dated 13.09.2022 by which the concerned Court rejects the complaint of the petitioner for its non-prosecution.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel Sri.Praveena Kumara Nirvani, appearing for the petitioner.

¶22

The petitioner is the complainant and the

¶23

respondent is the accused. The complainant and the respondent have a transaction. The transaction gone wrong leads the complainant to the concerned Court invoking Section 200 of Cr.P.C., for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. In the proceedings, the petitioner failed to take necessary steps to serve the accused or get his sworn statement recorded on several occasions when the matter was listed. The Court, noticing the continuous absence of the petitioner, dismissed the complaint under Section 203 of

¶24

¶25

NC: 2024:KHC:51295 CRL.P No. 2238 of 2023

¶26

the Cr.P.C., for his non-appearance and non-cooperation with the proceedings. It is this, that has driven the petitioner to this Court, in the subject petition.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if one opportunity would be granted to him, he would do the needful before the concerned Court, as the amount involved in the cheque is hard earned money and therefore, it is necessary for the Court to consider the same on its merit and pass orders, in accordance with law.

¶28

In the light of the compliant getting closed under Section 203 of Cr.P.C., not on the merit of the matter, but for the default of the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to grant one opportunity to the petitioner to appear before the Court and the Court to regulate its procedure on his appearance.

¶29

In that light, the following:

¶30

ORDER

¶31

i) The criminal petition is allowed;

¶32

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:51295 CRL.P No. 2238 of 2023

¶33

ii) The petition is restored to file before the concerned Court;

¶34

iii) The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court and cooperate with the proceedings;

¶35

iv) In the event the petitioner would again default, it is open for the concerned Court to pass necessary orders, in accordance with law.

¶36

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

¶37

KG List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2

M/S Guru Fab v. G P Steel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Guru Fab v. G P Steel

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

Chandra @ v Chandrashekara Bhat, Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri M L Nagaraja Vs the Deputy Superintendent of Police

Sri Syed Muneer Ahmed Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri Shadakshari P Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri Shadakshari P Vs State of Karnataka by

Mr Thimmaraju @ K Thimmaraju Vs Mr Shankara