IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1403 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
M/s.J.C.Kala Educational And Cultural Trust, Rep. by its Chairman, Sri. H.R.Satish Chandra, S/o Late H.A.Ramachandra Major in Age, No.B-1, KHB Colony, Puttenahalli Extension, Yelahanka, Bengaluru-560094 Rep. by its Special Power of Attorney Holder Sri. Shyamsundra J.N.
S/o. Neelakanta Bhat. ...Appellant (By Sri. Shankar P. Hegde, Advocate) AND:
1. Sri. Jatti Engineering India Pvt. Ltd., R/at Sy. No.51, Pattanaduru Agrahara Village, Outer Circle, Whitefield, Bengaluru-560066 Rep. by its Director.
2. Mrs. Rani Danappa @ Lakshmi M.Bhat, W/o. D.B. Jatti, Director, Sri. Jatti Engineering India Pvt. Ltd., R/at Sy.No.51, Pattanaduru Agrahara Village, Outer Circle, Whitefield, Bengaluru-560066. ...Respondents This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C praying to set aside the impugned judgment dated:16.07.2016 passed by the XXI A.C.M.M., Bengaluru in C.C.No.37781/2010 by dismissing the complainant and acquitting the respondents and grievances of complaint including prayers sought as pleaded in C.C.No.37781/2010 by the appellant/complaint has to be get considered and allow the same in favour of appellant/complaint by giving directions to the respondents to pay doubling the subject matter of the cheque amount of Rs.2,00,000/- with imposing fine and sentence and allow this revision petition.
This Appeal coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Called again in the afternoon Session. Learned counsel for the appellant absent.
2. The present appeal is of the year 2016. A perusal of the order sheet go to show that noticing that on several dates of hearing that learned counsel for the appellant had remained absent, this Court by order dated 10.10.2018, ordered for issuance of emergent Court notice upon the appellant asking for the appearance of the appellant and for further proceeding in the matter. Even thereafter also, there was neither presence of the appellant nor that of his counsel, as such, on 25.10.2018, there was no representation from the appellant’s side, so also on 09.01.2019.
3. A perusal of the office shara go to show that the emergent Court notice has been served on the appellant, despite which, neither the appellant is present nor his counsel, thus making it very clear that the appellant is not evincing any interest in prosecuting the matter.
4. Though normally a criminal appeal would not be dismissed for non prosecution or for not taking steps, however, the present appeal is not against the judgment of conviction, but it is against the judgment of acquittal of the present respondent for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
5. For the reasons shown above and in view of the fact that the appellant is not evincing any interest in prosecuting the matter which is of the year 2016, it has to be necessarily held that the appellant is not prosecuting the matter.
Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed for non prosecution.
Sd/- JUDGE GH