IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1323/2010 BETWEEN:
Ramachandra, S/o. Abbaiah, Aged about 60 years, R/a: Handenahalli Village, Hoskote Taluk, Bengaluru. …Appellant (By Sri. Anand R.B., Advocate) AND:
1. State of Kadugodi Police, Represented by State Public Prosecutor.
2. Byregowda S/o Sonnappa, 25 years, Khajihosahalli Grama, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk.
3. Mariyappa s/o Anjanappa 25 years, Khajihosahalli Grama, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk.
4. Babu S/o Anjanappa 22 years, Khajihosahalli Grama, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk.
5. Narayanaswamy, S/o Sadappa, 21 Years, Khajihosahalli Grama, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk.
6. Rajanna S/o Byrappa, 37 years, Khajihosahalli Grama, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk.
7. Ravi S/o. Muniyappa, 25 years, Paramanahalli Grama, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hoskote Taluk.
8. Jayaram S/o Muniyappa, 25 years, Owner of Tempo No.KA-03,7494, Paramanahalli Grama, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk.
9. H.V.Prakasha, S/o.Late Venkataramanappa, 33 years, R/o Handenahalli Grama, Anugondanahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk.
10. Krishnappa S/o Marappa 45 years, Narkaraguttahalli Grama, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk.
11. H.V.Suresha, S/o Late Venkataramanappa, 29 years, Handenahalli Grama, Anugondanahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk.
12. H.V.Krishnappa S/o Late Venkataramanappa, 49 years, Handenahalli Grama, Anugondanahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk.
13. Gopala S/o. Karegowda, 36 Years, Janardhana Reddy, Building, Araleri Road, Malur Town, Kolar District. .. Respondents (Sri.Divakar Maddur, HCGP for R-1 Sri.H.M.Thimmarayappa, Advocate, for R-9,11,12 & 13 Miss Reny Sebastian, Advocate for R-2 to R-8 & R-10.) This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 372 of Cr.P.C praying to set aside the judgment of acquittal dated 26.08.2010 passed by the Prl.Sessions Judge / I/c. I Addl.Dist. Judge, Bengaluru (R) Dist. Bengaluru in S.C.NO.310/03-acquiting the respondent/accused for the offence punishable under Section 397 of IPC.
This Criminal Appeal coming on for Hearing this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Learned counsel for the appellant is absent.
Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 alone present.
3. This matter is coming up in the weekly list since some time. However, learned counsel for the appellant has remained absent. A perusal of the order sheet would go to show that continuously on all the dates of hearing from 4.7.2018 till today, i.e., on 4.7.2018, 23.1.2019, 24.1.2019, 25.1.2019 6.2.2019 and on 12.2.2019, when the matter was taken up, learned counsel for the appellant has remained absent.
4. Though generally a criminal appeal would not be dismissed for non-prosecution, the present appeal is not against the judgment of conviction, but, it is an appeal against the judgment of acquittal of accused Nos.2 to 13 for the offence punishable under Section 397 of Indian Penal Code, the complainant has preferred this appeal. Inspite of filing the appeal, the appellant appears to have not evincing any interest in prosecuting the matter.
5. The present appeal is one of the old matters pending before this Court. In such circumstances where the appellant is not evincing any interest in prosecuting the matter, I am of the view that the appeal does not deserves appointment of an Amicus Curiae or a counsel form the panel of High Court Legal Services Committee, Bengaluru, but, to be dismissed for non-prosecution.
Accordingly, the Appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/- JUDGE bk/