Allowed

Subramanya v. Manjunatha Patil

Karnataka HC3 Feb 2026CRL.A/2446/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against dismissal of a cheque dishonour complaint for default by the complainant. The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order for failure to verify NBW execution, and restored the case to the trial file.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dismissing the complaint for default is set aside, and the case is restored to the original file for further proceedings.

Subramanya Vs Manjunatha Patil — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:6412 CRL.A No. 2446 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2446 OF 2025 (A-)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SUBRAMANYA S/O. THIMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O. 173, SRI. LAKSHMIRANGANATH NILAYA, THEJURU ROAD, HASSAN-573201.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. ANANDA RAMACHANDRA DASS, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B

¶14

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

MANJUNATHA PATIL S/O RAVASAB PATIL, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, NASALAPURA, RAYABAGA TALUK, BELAGAVI DISTRICT- 591213.

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 03.02.2026)

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S.378(4) PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 23.07.2025, PASSED BY THE

¶19

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:6412 CRL.A No. 2446 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

HON'BLE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., HASSAN, IN C.C.NO.6158/2021 AND ETC.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

The appellant has preferred this appeal against the

¶27

order dated 23.07.2025, passed by the learned Prl.Civil Judge and JMFC, Hassan, (hereinafter referred to as `trial Court'), in C.C.No.6158/2021.

¶28

The appellant/complainant had filed a complaint

¶29

under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. After the sworn statement, the trial Court has registered the case in C.C.No.6158/2021 and summons was issued to the accused. The summons were duly served on the accused as per the order dated 20.01.2023, however, accused did not appear before the trial Court. Hence, trial

¶30

Court has passed an order to issue NBW to the accused. Thereafter, the case was being adjourned from time to

¶31

¶32

NC: 2026:KHC:6412 CRL.A No. 2446 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

time till 23.07.2025. On 23.07.2025, the trial Court has passed the order, which reads as under :

¶35

" Case called out.

¶36

Complainant and his counsel are absent. Call

¶37

again later.

¶38

Case again called by 2^nd round.

¶39

Complainant and his counsel are absent. Call again by afternoon session.

¶40

Case again called by afternoon session. Complainant and her (sic) counsel are absent.

¶41

It is to be noted that, the present private complaint has been filed in the year 2021 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act. In the last hearing date this court has granted an opportunity to the complainant to take proper steps with a caution of dismissal of the case in default. Inspite of it, the complainant neither present before the court nor taken any steps and even there is no representation for the complainant. The said conduct of the complainant discloses that he is not interested in prosecuting the case. That being the case, it is meaningless in continuing the case in this passion besides it will waste the precious time of this court. Hence, the case of the complainant is dismissed for default."

¶42

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC:6412 CRL.A No. 2446 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

A perusal of the order sheet reveals that though the trial Court has issued NBW to the accused and process fee was paid, the NBW issued to the accused was not returned. When the trial Court has issued NBW to the accused, it is the duty of the trial Court to ensure whether

¶46

NBW is executed or not. Without ascertaining this fact, the trial Court has proceeded to pass the impugned order, which is not sustainable under law as the same is illegal. Hence, I proceed to pass the following :

¶47

ORDER

¶48

(i) The Criminal Appeal is allowed.

¶49

(ii) The order dated 23.07.2025, passed by the

¶50

learned Prl.Civil Judge and JMFC, Hassan, in C.C.No.6158/2021, is set aside and the case is restored to its original file.

¶51

(iii) The appellant/complainant is directed to appear before the trial Court on 10.03.2026 without waiting for any further notice.

¶52

Thereafter, the trial Court is directed to secure

¶53

¶54

NC: 2026:KHC:6412 CRL.A No. 2446 of 2025

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

the presence of the accused by issuing NBW and

¶57

proceed in accordance with law.

¶58

The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order

¶59

to the concerned trial Court.

¶60

Sd/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

¶61

BK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

Subramanya v. Manjunatha Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subramanya v. Manjunatha Patil

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

Sri S Suresha Vs Sri B R Satish

Anthonyswamy Vs Vijay Kumar M

Raghavan .D Since Dead by His Lr'S. Smt. Shanthi Vs Sri S Ravi

Ashok Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Jayambika Chits Pvt. Ltd., Vs Mr Sharath Jain B G

Smt. Malla Subramani T Vs Mangamma (Mamatha)