Dismissed¶33

Sri Manohara M N v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC16 Jan 2025CRL.A/25/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissed-for-default criminal appeal, Karnataka HC Bengaluru, CRL.A No. 25 of 2024, decided 16.01.2025 by Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar. Appeal under S.14(A) SC/ST Act by Manohara M N against judgment dated 11.10.2023 in Spl.C.C.No.52/2019 (V Addl. Session Judge, Mandya), seeking conviction of the accused under Ss.341/323/504/506/353 IPC and S.3(1)(r)(s) SC/ST (POA) Act. Respondents: State of Karnataka (Maddur Police Station) and Suresh R. Dismissed for non-compliance of office objections after four listings and counsel's repeated absence.

What did the court decide?

Despite sufficient time and a final opportunity granted on 20.11.2024, office objections were not complied with, and the appellant appeared not interested in prosecuting the appeal. ¶33

Sri Manohara M N Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:1564 CRL.A No. 25 of 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 25 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI MANOHARA M N S/O LATE NARAYAN AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS WORKING AS FIRST DIVISION ASSISTANT IN THE OFFICE OF TAHSILDAR AT SRIRANGAPATNA SRIRANGAPATNAN TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 438.

¶8

PERMANENT RESIDENT OF No.561, 2^ND CROSS UDAYGIRI MANDYA CITY MANDYA - 571 401.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

(BY SRI MAHADEVA SWAMY M, ADVOCATE – ABSENT)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY MADDUR POLICE STATION MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 401.

¶14

SRI SURESH R S/O RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDING AT ABALAVADI VILLAGE

¶15

NC: 2025:KHC:1564 CRL.A No. 25 of 2024

¶16

¶17

KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 425.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI B LAKSHMAN, HCGP FOR R1)

¶20

THIS CRL.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A) OF SC/ST ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.10.2023 IN SPL.C.C.No.52/2019 JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE V ADDL.SESSION JUDGE AT MANDYA AND ALLOW THE APPEAL BY CONVICTING THE ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 341, 323, 504, 506, 353 OF IPC AND SEC.3(1)(r)(s) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT AND ETC.,

¶21

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶24

Learned counsel for appellant is absent. No

¶25

representation.

¶26

This Court on 20.11.2024 has passed the

¶27

following order:

¶28

“ Learned counsel for the appellant is absent. No representation.

¶29

The appeal is of the year 2024 and it is listed for third time for compliance of office objections.

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1564 CRL.A No. 25 of 2024

¶31

I do not find any reason to adjourn the matter, however, to afford final opportunity, list this matter after one week.”

¶32

This appeal is listed today for non-compliance of

¶33

office objections for the fourth time. Inspite of granting sufficient time office objections are not complied. It appears, that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of office objections.

¶34

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶35

LRS

¶36

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8

Sri Manohara M N v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Manohara M N v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. P. Shanthilal Jain Vs Smt. Indira @ Indumathi

Sri Nagaraju Vs Sri Kodanda Rama Raju

Sri B S Kumaraswamy Vs Sri Nagendramurthy

N Ramesh Vs Muniswamappa

Sri P Vinod Kumar Vs Sri Abdul Sattar

S C Mohan Vs Hot Man Builders Private Ltd.