IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY CRIMINAL APPEAL No.510 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
B.S. Lokeshappa S/o. Sannacharappa Aged about 41 years, Agriculturist, R/o. B.M. Koppalu village Somanahalli Post Singatagere Hobli, Kadur Taluk- 58115 Chikmagalur District.
(By Mr. Jagadeesh H.T., Advocate) AND:
Kumara S/o. Sannamariyappan Aged about 51 years R/o. behind Sadhana Chithramandira 1st Cross, 2nd House Arsikere Town 573 103 Hasan District.
(By Mr. Santhosh, Advocate) …Appellant …Respondent This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C praying to set aside the judgment and order of acquittal dated: 09.02.2017 passed by the Senior civil Judge and JMFC, Arsikere in C.C.No.281/2014 acquitting the Respondent/accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act.
This Criminal Appeal coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Called again in the afternoon.
Learned counsel for the appellant absent.
2. A perusal of the order sheet would go to show that in this appeal of the year 2017, sufficient time even as finally has already been granted to the appellant to make a submission and proceed further in the matter, despite which the learned counsel for the appellant has remained absent on 29.01.2019. Noticing the absence of the learned counsel for the appellant, this court had made the following observation:-
“None appear in the matter.
As a final chance and making it clear that no further adjournment would be granted in the matter and for non-appearance of the learned counsel for the appellant and proceeding further in the matter, the Court may proceed to dismiss the appeal, a week’s time is granted.
List the matter in the next week.”
3. In continuation of the above, since despite such a final opportunity granted to him and also noticing the absence of the learned counsel for the appellant, this matter being passed over, in the forenoon session, still, the learned counsel for the appellant has remained absent and there is no representation from the appellant’s side. Therefore, it clearly goes to show that the appellant is not evincing any interest in prosecuting the matter.
4. Even though generally a criminal appeal would not be dismissed for non-prosecution, but it is a criminal appeal not against the judgment of conviction filed by the accused, but it is against the judgment of acquittal filed by the complainant challenging the order of acquittal of the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act.
5. In the said circumstances, when the appellant, despite granting sufficient adjournments and opportunities, has constantly remained absent and is not evincing any interest in prosecuting the matter, this court is constrained to dismiss the appeal for non prosecution.
Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed for non- prosecution.
Sd/- JUDGE BMV*