- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37515 WP No. 28190 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 28190 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: M/S BOLA SURENDRA KAMATH & SONS, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, KEDINJE-574110. KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT. REP BY ITS, GPA HOLDER - ACCOUNTANT, MR.DHEERAJ POOJARY, S/O JAYANTHI, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, ATTUR GUNDYADKA HOUSE, NITTE VILLAGE-576213. UDUPI DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NANDEESH C B., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. CHANDRANATH ARIGA K., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. YOGESH JAIN FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, AGED MAJOR, PROPRIETOR OF VARDHMAN TRADING CO, RAJENDRA BHAVAN 756, TIKKI WALON ALON KA RASTA, KISHNPLE BAZAR, JAIPUR-302 001. RAJASTHAN. …RESPONDENT THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 20.11.2023 Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37515 WP No. 28190 of 2024 AND 28.12.2023 PASSED IN THE CC NO. 880/2019 BY THE PRL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KARKALA ANNX-J AND CONSEQUENTLY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER It is well settled that an order dismissing a private complaint for non-payment of process fee amounts to a dismissal under Section 204(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Such an order does not amount to an acquittal within the meaning of Section 256 Cr.P.C., but is an interlocutory order revisable under Section 397 Cr.P.C. A Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in Smt. Renuka v. State of Karnataka [2016 (4) KCCR 2883] has categorically held that dismissal of a complaint for non-payment of process fee falls within the ambit of Section 204(4) and therefore the proper remedy is to invoke revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 Cr.P.C. Similarly, in Gopal v. Lakshmamma [2014 (3) KCCR 2121], it has been observed that such dismissal does not finally terminate the proceedings so as to attract the provisions of appeal, but is amenable to revision. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37515 WP No. 28190 of 2024 2. In view of the above legal position, reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate statutory remedy of revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C., this petition is dismissed. 3. However, it is clarified that the time spent by the petitioner in prosecuting the present petition shall be excluded, in the event a revision petition is filed within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 4. The Registry is directed to forthwith return the certified copies produced by the petitioner after retaining photocopies of the same for record. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 101