- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2550 CRL.A No. 2175 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2175 OF 2018 BETWEEN: M/S GOOD COFFEE SUPPLIES HAVING ITS OFFICE AT No.1/1 5TH MAIN ROAD, CHIKKANNA GARDEN CHAMARAJAPET BANGALORE – 560 018. REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI S S PRASHANTH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS …APPELLANT (BY SRI HARINATH M S, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S PRAGATHEE COFFEE AND TEA SUPPLY CO. HAVING ITS BUSINESS ORGANIZATION AT:No.99/C, 3RD MAIN ROAD OPP. VISHWA BHARATHI HOSPITAL HANUMANTHA NAGAR BANGALORE - 560 019. REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR: SRI G R SUBRAMANIAM AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M J ALVA, ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) Cr.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF DISMISSAL OF THE COMPLAINT ON NON-PROSECUTION PASSED BY THE THE XXI Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2550 CRL.A No. 2175 of 2018 ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU IN C.C.No.8010/2018- ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.T. ACT AND ETC., THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant – complainant praying to set-aside the order dated 14.11.2018 passed in C.C.No.8010/2018 by the XXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, whereunder, the complaint of the appellant – complainant came to be dismissed for non prosecution. 2. The appellant – complainant had initiated the proceedings against the respondent – accused for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short hereinafter referred to as ‘N.I.Act’), and it was pending on the file of the XXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.No.8010/2018. The said case was listed for cross examination of PW1 – complainant on 14.11.2018. On that day, noting the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2550 CRL.A No. 2175 of 2018 absence of the appellant – complainant and his counsel, the complaint came to be dismissed for non prosecution. The said order has been challenged by the appellant – complainant in this appeal. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant – complainant and learned counsel for the respondent – accused. With the consent of both the counsels, even though the matter is listed for admission, it is taken up for final disposal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant – complainant would contend that the appellant – complainant could not present himself on 14.11.2018 due to puncture of his bike when he was going along with his counsel on the said bike and they reached the Court premises late, meanwhile, the complaint was dismissed for non prosecution. He further submits that the absence of the appellant – complainant on that day was for bonafide reason. With this, he prayed for allowing the appeal and restoration of the criminal case. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2550 CRL.A No. 2175 of 2018 5. Learned counsel for the respondent – accused would contend that the appellant – complainant is not diligent in prosecuting his case. He was absent on 23.10.2018 and also on 14.11.2018. Considering the absence of the appellant – complainant, the learned Magistrate has rightly dismissed his complaint for non prosecution. With this, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 6. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has perused the impugned order and the other materials placed on record. 7. The appellant – complainant had initiated the proceedings against the respondent – accused for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act and it was pending on the file of XXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.No.8010/2018. The said case came to be listed on 20.09.2018 for cross examination of PW1 – complainant. On that day, the respondent – accused was absent and cross examination was deferred and the case was ordered to be listed on - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2550 CRL.A No. 2175 of 2018 23.10.2018. On 23.10.2018, the appellant – complainant was absent and the application has been filed for exemption of presence of the appellant – complainant and it was allowed. On that day, the respondent – accused has changed his counsel and the new counsel has filed the N.O.C vakalath for the respondent – accused and the case was adjourned for cross examination to 14.11.2018. On 14.11.2018, the appellant – complainant was absent. Noting the absence of the appellant – complainant and his counsel, the complaint came to be dismissed for non prosecution. In Paragraph 7 of the appeal memo, it is stated that the appellant – complainant and his counsel were coming on the bike and it was punctured and therefore, they could not attend the Court on that day. The absence of the appellant – complainant on 14.11.2018 is for bonafide reason. Considering the said aspect, the appellant – complainant has made out case for allowing the appeal and restoration of the criminal case. In the result, the following; - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:2550 CRL.A No. 2175 of 2018 ORDER The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 14.11.2018 passed in C.C.No.8010/2018 by the XXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru is set- aside and the criminal case is ordered to be restored. The appellant – complainant and the respondent – accused are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 25.02.2025, without awaiting for any Court notice. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23