Sri Dyamanna D Vs Sri Narasimhamurthy C — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2025)

Sri Dyamanna D Vs Sri Narasimhamurthy C — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissal-for-non-prosecution order dated 23.6.2023 in CC No.4355/2018 set aside; complaint restored to the file of the III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumakuru District, to proceed in accordance with law; petitioner to deposit cost of Rs.5,000/- with District Legal Services Authority, Tumakuru and appear before the trial Court on or before 31.10.2025.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order of the learned Magistrate dismissing the complaint (CC No.4355/2018, offence punishable under Section 138 N.I. Act) for non-prosecution should be set aside and the complaint restored.

Court's answer

Considering the entire facts and circumstances, this Court deemed it fit to give the complainant an opportunity to prosecute the case before the trial Court, to meet the ends of justice, however by imposing cost.

Ratio / Principle

The order dated 23.6.2023 passed by the III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumakuru District, in CC No.4355/2018, dismissing the complaint for non-prosecution, is set aside.

Key takeaways

The learned Magistrate shall restore the complaint to the file and proceed with the matter in accordance with law.ratio¶¶47
Cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) shall be deposited by the petitioner with the District Legal Services Authority, Tumakuru.ratio¶¶49
The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court without further notice on or before 31.10.2025.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal petition under S.482 Cr.P.C. by the complainant in CC No.4355/2018 (offence punishable under S.138 N.I. Act arising out of a dishonoured cheque of Rs.2,90,000/-) challenging the order dated 23.06.2023 of the III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumakuru District dismissing the complaint for non-prosecution; a prior revision before the Sessions Court had been dismissed. Holding that the complainant should be given an opportunity to prosecute the case to meet the ends of justice, subject to cost, the High Court set aside the dismissal order, directed restoration of the complaint to the file, imposed cost of Rs.5,000/- payable to the District Legal Services Authority, Tumakuru, and required the petitioner to appear before the trial Court on or before 31.10.2025.

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:41291 CRL.P No. 9045 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9045 OF 2025

BETWEEN:

SRI. DYAMANNA D. S/O DYAMUNA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT BASAVANAPALYA, SIRA GATE, OPP. GOVT. SCHOOL, TUMAKURU-572 117.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH M.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

SRI. NARASIMHAMURTHY C. S/O LATE CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT CHANNAVEERANAHALLI VILLAGE, KADALAPPANAHALLI POST, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-561 204. ALSO AT: TALUK LICENSE SURVEYOR, TAHASILDHAR OFFICE, CHIKKABALLAPURA TOWN, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562 101.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. JAGAN MOHAN M.T., ADVOCATE)

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:41291 CRL.P No. 9045 of 2025

HC-KAR

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO (A) SET-ASIDE THE ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR NONPROSECUTION DATED 23.06.2023 PASSED BY III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TUMAKURU DISTRICT IN C.C.NO.4355/2018; (B) RESTORE THE C.C.NO.4355/2018 REGISTERED FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 138 OF N.I. ACT. IN ITS ORIGINAL FILE BEFORE THE III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT TUMAKURU DISTRICT AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

ORAL ORDER

The order passed by the learned Magistrate dismissing the complaint filed by the petitioner against the respondent alleging an offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act, for non-prosecution, has been assailed in this petition.

The learned Magistrate has observed in the order that ‘sufficient opportunity was given to the complainant to take steps against the accused, in spite of

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:41291 CRL.P No. 9045 of 2025

HC-KAR

which he has failed to do so and he has not furnished necessary process fee in respect of issuance of NBW to the accused.’

Challenging the impugned order, initially, the petitioner/complainant preferred a revision petition before the Sessions Court, which was dismissed confirming the order of the learned Magistrate. The said order was challenged by way of an appeal before this Court which was permitted to be converted into the present criminal petition.

The respondent is alleged to have issued a

cheque for a sum of Rs.2,90,000/- to the petitioner towards the discharge of legally enforceable debt. The said cheque was returned dishonoured when presented to the Banker and therefore, the petitioner has initiated the proceedings against the respondent under Section 138 of the N.I.Act.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:41291 CRL.P No. 9045 of 2025

HC-KAR

From the material on record, it is seen that on 7.5.2018 the complainant appeared before the trial Court and his sworn statement was recorded. Exs.P1 to P9 were also marked. Summons were issued to the accused in compliance of which steps were taken on 22.4.2019. Inspite of service of summons, the respondent/accused failed to appear before the trial Court. Therefore, NBW was issued.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for

petitioner that after issuance of NBW, process was paid. Later, in view of COVID 19 pandemic, the petitioner could not take further steps during the said period and thereafter the complainant and his counsel were present before the trial Court and process fee was paid to issue NBW to the accused. However, on the date of the impugned order, as there was no representation for the complainant, the learned Magistrate has passed the impugned order.

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:41291 CRL.P No. 9045 of 2025

HC-KAR

Considering the entire facts and circumstances

of the case, this Court deems it fit to give an opportunity to the complainant to prosecute the case before the trial Court, to meet the ends of justice, however, by imposing cost. Accordingly, the following:

ORDER

I. Petition is allowed.

II. The order dated 23.6.2023 passed by the Court

of the III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumakuru District, in CC No.4355/2018, dismissing the complaint for non-prosecution is set aside.

III. Learned Magistrate shall restore the complaint

to the file and proceed with the matter in accordance with law.

IV. Cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only)

shall be deposited by the petitioner with the District Legal Services Authority, Tumakuru.

NC: 2025:KHC:41291 CRL.P No. 9045 of 2025

6 -

HC-KAR

V. Petitioner shall appear before the trial Court

without further notice on or before 31.10.2025.

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

TL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64