- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2798 CRL.A No. 542 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 542 OF 2013 BETWEEN: GOPALAKRISNA K S S/O K. SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT No.164-K, 14TH CROSS 19TH " A " MAIN, I BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE -560 010. …APPELLANT (BY SRI A SAI PRAKASH, ADVOCATE – ABSENT) AND: JANARDHANA BADIGER S/O NEELAKANTA BADGER AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT No.51, NANDAN GARDEN SUNCITY ROAD, KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN BANGALORE – 560 060. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI RAGHAVENDRA H S, ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) Cr.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 01.04.2013 PASSED BY THE XXI ADDL. SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XIX ADDL. C.M.M., BANGALORE IN C.C.No.26975/2007 - ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I.ACT AND ETC., Digitally signed by HEMAVATHY GANGABYRAPPA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2798 CRL.A No. 542 of 2013 THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellant is absent. Learned counsel for the appellant was also absent on 07.08.2024 and 13.09.2024. On 13.09.2024, the Court has passed the following order; “Learned counsel for the appellant is absent. No representation. The appeal is of the year 2013. On the last date of hearing also, learned counsel for the appellant was absent. Inspite of that, considering the application, I.A.No.1/2013 was allowed and leave was granted to prosecute the matter. Inspite of that, the appellant is not present to address his arguments on admission. I do not find any reason to adjourn the matter. However, to afford final opportunity, two weeks’ time is granted.” The appeal is of the year 2013 and it is listed for admission. There is no representation on appellant’s side. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2798 CRL.A No. 542 of 2013 Inspite of granting sufficient opportunity, counsel for the appellant has not appeared. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non prosecution. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20