- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21471 CRL.A No. 641 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 641 OF 2025 (A) BETWEEN: SMT. YESHASHWINI DAUGHTER OF SRI. CHANNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS NO5/1, FOURTH SHOP LANE, TATA SILK FARM, BASAVANAGUDI BANGALORE - 560 004 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. AKKI MANJUNATH GOWDA K., ADV.) AND: SMT. RENUKAMMA. T WIFE OF RAVIKUMAR NEAR BUS STOP, GANGONDANAHALLI LAKSHMIPURA BENGALURU 562 123 …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) CR.P.C (U/S 419(4) BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 21.12.2024 PASSED BY THE XVI ACJM, BANGALORE IN CC.NO.27057/2023 DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT FOR NON- PROSECUTION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21471 CRL.A No. 641 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The appellant/complainant is before this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 21.12.2024 passed by the XVI ACJM, Bengaluru in C.C No.27057/2023 dismissing the complaint for non-prosecution. 2. Heard Sri.Akki Manjunath Gowda.K, learned counsel for the appellant. 3. It is the contention of learned counsel for the appellant/ complainant that the appellant got marked 9 documents as Exs.P1 to P9 in his evidence. The Trial Court issued a summons to the accused by Speed Post, Registered Post Acknowledgment Due and through jurisdictional police and posted the matter on 23.09.2023. The appellant/ complainant had taken all steps as per the direction of the Trial Court. 4. It is further submitted that the matter was referred to the Lok Adalath. The Court issued notice to both parties. On 21.01.2023, the appellant/complainant was present before the Court and notice was issued to both parties. However, the whereabouts of the accused were not - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21471 CRL.A No. 641 of 2025 known. Hence, the appellant/complainant could not take the necessary steps. Such being the fact, the Trial Court on 21.12.2024, passed an order dismissing the complaint for non-prosecution and for not taking proper steps, which causes great injustice to the appellant/complainant. As such, the learned counsel for the appellant prays to allow the appeal. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also perused the order sheet of the Trial Court, though it appears that, the Trial Court took a right view in passing the said order, the fact remains that, the accused had not appeared to the Court inspite of proper steps having been taken by the complainant. In fact, the jurisdictional police have not acted properly to issue a notice to the accused. Such being the fact, the Court should have taken necessary steps to issue a bailable warrant to the accused. 6. It is needless to say that summonses are issued to the accused under the Criminal Rules of Practice through the police. Such being the fact, it is the duty of the police to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21471 CRL.A No. 641 of 2025 take the assistance of the complainant to trace the address of the accused. 7. The order of dismissing the complaint for not taking proper steps, in my considered view, under the Criminal Rules of Practice is not proper and appropriate. Hence, the order of dismissal of the complaint has to be set aside. 8. In the light of the observation made above, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed. ii) The order dated 21.12.2024 passed in C.C No.27057/2023 by the XVI ACJM, Bengaluru, is set aside. iii) The Trial Court is directed to restore the file and proceed with the case from the stage where it was stopped. SD/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE UN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43