- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29079 CRL.A No. 1439 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1439 OF 2024 (U/S 14(A) (2)) BETWEEN: V GANGADHARA S/O VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS LABOURER, R/AT MALLEGOWDANAHALLI VILLAGE, JAVAGONDANAHALLI HOBLI, HIRIYUR TALUK CHITRADURGA DIST – 577 501 NOW RESIDING AT C/O KEMPEGOWDA BEHIND SUMATHI SHCOOL CHANDRAMOULESHWARA EXTENSION KYATASANDRA TUMAKURU CITY …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MOHAMED UMMAR FAROOQ., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY NEW EXTENSION POLICE TUMAKURU CITY, REP BY SPP HIGH COURT CAMPUS BANGALORE 560 001 Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29079 CRL.A No. 1439 of 2024 2. H S NARASIMHAIAH S/O LATE SHETTIKADARAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT HULLEKERE VILLAGE DANDINASHIVARA HOBLI TURUVEKER TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT – 572 227 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1; R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 14(A)(2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15.12.2023 PASSED IN C.MISC.NO.1765/2023 BY HONBLE III ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT TUMAKURU AND ENLARGE THE APPELLANT ON BAIL IN SPL.C.C.NO.541/2023 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.51/2023 REGISTERED WITH RESPONDENT NEW EXTENSION P.S. FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/S 302, 201 OF IPC R/W 3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) AMENDMENT ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE III ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT TUMAKURU IN WHICH THIS APPELLANT IS ARRAYED AS ACCUSED. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29079 CRL.A No. 1439 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT Case called out. The matter is listed for non-compliance of office objections for fourth time. However, learned counsel for appellant has failed to comply with the office objections despite giving sufficient opportunities. Therefore, it appears that he is not interested to proceed with the case. Hence, it is appropriate to dismiss the appeal for non-compliance of office objections. 2. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE JS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1