Dismissed¶31

Sri C Lakshmipathi v. Sri v Bhaskar

Karnataka HC10 Feb 2025CRL.A/65/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court (Bengaluru), Shivashankar Amaranavar J., 10.02.2025, NC: 2025:KHC:5847 — CRL.A No. 65 of 2015 under S.378(4) Cr.P.C. against S.138 N.I. Act acquittal (C.C.No.14321/2007, 18th ACMM, order dt. 30.10.2014) dismissed for non-prosecution; appellant's counsel repeatedly absent (18.12.2023, 16.01.2024, 08.02.2024 and on hearing date); respondent served but unrepresented; no merits decided, no precedent discussed.

What did the court decide?

Despite sufficient opportunity granted on multiple dates, learned counsel for the appellant did not appear to argue the appeal, and it appears the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the matter. ¶30

Sri C Lakshmipathi Vs Sri v Bhaskar — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5847 CRL.A No. 65 of 2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 65 OF 2015

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI C LAKSHMIPATHI S/O LATE CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT NO.34, CHIKKANNA BUILDING SANJAYANAGAR MAIN ROAD BANGALORE-560 094

¶8

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. K.M. RAVI KUMAR, ADVOCATE -ABSENT)

¶9

AND:

¶10

Digitally signed by HEMAVATHY GANGABYRAPPA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

SRI V BHASKAR S/O SRI. C. VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT NO.2/14 POOJARI LAYOUT GEDDALAHALLI BANGALORE- 560 094

¶12

…RESPONDENT

¶13

RESPONDENT IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED

¶14

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED:30.10.2014, PASSED BY THE 18TH ACMM, BANGALORE CITY, IN C.C.NO.14321/2007 - ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I. ACT.

¶15

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

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:5847 CRL.A No. 65 of 2015

¶18

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶19

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶20

Learned counsel for the appellant is absent. There is no representation on the appellant side.

¶21

Learned counsel for the appellant was also absent on 18.12.2023, 16.01.2024 and 08.02.2024.

¶22

This Court on 08.02.2024 has passed the following order.

¶23

Sri. K. M. Ravi Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant are absent.

¶24

Respondent, though served, is absent.

¶25

Due to the absence of learned counsel for the appellant, matter could not be proceeded. This Court vide order dated 16.01.2024, inspite of absence of learned counsel for the appellant, granted time and the matter is listed today. However, today also there is no representation for the appellant. One more opportunity is given to the learned counsel for the appellant to address his argument, failing which, further orders will follow.

¶26

List the matter next week finally”

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC:5847 CRL.A No. 65 of 2015

¶28

¶29

The appeal is of the year 2015. Inspite of

¶30

granting sufficient opportunity, learned counsel for the appellant is not present to argue this matter. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting this matter.

¶31

Hence, the appeal is dismissed for nonprosecution.

¶32

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶33

DSP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48

Sri C Lakshmipathi v. Sri v Bhaskar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri C Lakshmipathi v. Sri v Bhaskar

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

Smt. Sunitha K Vs Sri. Nataraj

Sri Govindappa C Vs Sri Narayanaswamy

Sri Tyagarajanagar Credit Co. Op Society Ltd. Vs Smt Roseline Prabhavathy

M/S. Rajesh Exports Limited., Vs Smt. S. Manjula

M/S Kuff N Kollar Vs M/S Revuesoft Solutions India Pvt. Ltd.

Smt. S N Jyothi Vs M S Subramani