Dismissed¶26

Sri Prashanth, v. Sri.v. Sridhar Babu v

Karnataka HC17 Sept 2025CRL.P/4315/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of criminal petition under S.482 Cr.P.C (528 BNSS) challenging dismissal of C.C.No.1761/2020 for non-prosecution and acquittal of accused; liberty to approach appropriate Court/District Court within one month; exclusion of time spent before High Court for limitation; certified copies returned; pending applications disposed; Karnataka High Court; Justice J.M. Khazi; 17-09-2025; XVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Bengaluru; CRL.P No. 4315 of 2023.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach the appropriate Court within one month, if permissible under law, with exclusion of time spent before this Court for computing limitation; Registry to return certified copies retaining Photostats. ¶26

Sri Prashanth, Vs Sri.v. Sridhar Babu v — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 19.01.2023 passed by the XVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, dismissing C.C.No.1761/2020 for non-prosecution and acquitting the accused should be set aside and the case restored. +1 more

¶18

Ratio / Principle

On the petitioner's memo, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate Court, if so permissible under law, within a period of one month.

¶26

Key takeaways

If the petitioner approaches the appropriate Court within the permitted period, he shall be entitled to exclusion of the time spent before this Court for the purpose of computing the period of limitation.ratio¶26
Registry directed to return the certified copies of the documents, if any, to the learned counsel for the petitioner, after retaining Photostat copies of the same.obiter¶31
In view of the dismissal, all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of since no further orders are required.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRL.P No. 4315 of 2023 (filed under S.482 Cr.P.C.; case-type annotation also references 528 BNSS), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, J.M. Khazi, J., decided 17.09.2025: The petitioner sought setting aside of the order dated 19.01.2023 passed by the learned XVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, in C.C.No.1761/2020 dismissing the criminal case for non-prosecution and acquitting the accused, and restoration of the case. Before adjudication, on the petitioner's memo stating his intention to approach the District Court against the dismissal, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to approach the appropriate Court within one month if so permissible under law, and with entitlement to exclusion of the time spent before the High Court in computing the period of limitation; the Registry was directed to return certified copies after retaining Photostat copies; all pending applications were disposed of.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:37203 CRL.P No. 4315 of 2023

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4315 OF 2023

¶7

(482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS))

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI PRASHANTH, S/O ASWATHANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT NO.18, I FLOOR, I CROSS, BEHIND SHANTHISAGAR HOTEL, CHIKKALLASANDRA, BANKERS COLONY, BENGALURU-560061

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. S VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SRI.V. SRIDHAR BABU V REKHA R AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, Location: High 7-25, MOPARRU, GUNTUR, Court of ANDRA PRADESH-522312 Karnataka AND ALSO AT V SRIDHAR BABU, NO.70A/13/2/5/200 KOMMIENIR SUBBA RAO TOWERS, VIDYANAGAR, 1/7^TH CROSS ROAD, GUNTUR, ANDRA PRADESH-522002

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(NIL)

¶16

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:37203 CRL.P No. 4315 of 2023

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19.01.2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED XVI ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE BENGALURU IN DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL CASE FOR NON PROSECUTION AND ACQUITTING THE ACCUSED IN C.C.NO.1761/2020 BY RESTORING THE SAME BEFORE THE XVI ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU.

¶19

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

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo

¶23

seeking permission of this Court withdraw the petition on the ground that the petitioner wants to approach the District Court against the dismissal of the complaint for non prosecution.

¶24

Aforesaid memo is placed on record.

¶25

In the light of the memo, the petition is dismissed

¶26

as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to approach appropriate Court, if so permissible under law, within a period of one month from today. In such an event, the petitioner shall be entitled to exclusion of the time spent

¶27

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC:37203 CRL.P No. 4315 of 2023

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

before this Court for the purpose of computing the period of limitation.

¶31

Registry is directed to return the certified copies of the documents, if any, to the learned counsel for the petitioner, after retaining Photostat copies of the same.

¶32

In view of dismissal of appeal, all pending application/s, if any is/are also disposed of, since no further orders is required.

¶33

Sd/(J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE

¶34

ASN

¶35

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8

Sri Prashanth, v. Sri.v. Sridhar Babu v

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Prashanth, v. Sri.v. Sridhar Babu v

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Prakash M Vs State by

The State by Doddabelavangala Station Vs Manjunatha

Sri Naveen G Vs the State by Anti Corruption Bureau

Tejas @ Kariya Vs State by

Chandrappa. H.Y Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Mohammed Rizwan Vs State of Karnataka