- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43527 CRL.P No. 8349 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8349 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI. NAGARAJA S. S/O LATE SHIVANNA L., AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING NEAR FIRE STATION, BAGALUR CROSS, NITTE MINAKSHI COLLEGE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 063. ALSO AT: SUPERINTENDENT, B E O OFFICE, BESIDE MARKET BUS STAND OPPOSITE, BENGALURU NORTH-560 004, K.R. PURAM, BENGALURU-36. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HARSHITH V., ADVOCATE FOR SMT. VEENA J. KAMATH, ADVOCATE (P/H)) AND: 1. MR. MYLARA SWAMY DRIVER, S/O LATE L. SHIVANNA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, K.S.R.T.C. SIRA DEPOT, SIRA-572 137, TUMKUR DISTRICT. 2. MR. S. MAHANTESH AGED 343 YEARS, S/O LATE L. SHIVANNA, Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43527 CRL.P No. 8349 of 2025 RAJENDRANAGARA, BEHIND AMBEDKAR CHOULTRY, CHITRADURGA-577 501. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NARAYAN MAYYAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2 (P/H)) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19.03.2025 PASSED IN C.C.NO.8750/2018 BY THE VII ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, AT BENGALURU IN DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT AND RESTORE THE SAME ON RECORD WITH A DIRECTION TO CONTINUE THE PROCEEDINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 19.03.2025 passed in C.C.No.8750/2018 by the Court of VII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bangalore. 2. Vide impugned order dated 19.03.2025, the learned Magistrate has dismissed the complaint filed by the petitioner against the respondents alleging offence punishable under Section 500 r/w 34 of IPC. The impugned order reads as under: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43527 CRL.P No. 8349 of 2025 “At this stage, perusal of order sheet reveals that this court took cognizance by order dt.22.03.2018 and issued process to the accused if PF is paid and list of witnesses is furnished. Further reveals that the complainant is not present since the date of taking cognizance and nor paid PF. Which shows the complainant is not interested to prosecute the case. Hence, complaint is dismissed for non-prosecution.” 3. The learned counsel for petitioner would contend that the observation made by the learned Magistrate that the complainant is not present since the date of taking cognizance and not paid PF, is erroneous, as the PF was paid by him. 4. A perusal of the order sheet goes to show that the PF was paid by the complainant and in so far as the accused is concerned proclamation and attachment warrant of movable and immovable property was issued under Section 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. This Court has also noticed that the complainant has remained absent on few occasions and not present on the date of passing the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43527 CRL.P No. 8349 of 2025 impugned order. In the fact and circumstances, petition can be allowed, imposing cost. Accordingly, the following: ORDER Petition is allowed. Order dated 19.03.2025 passed in C.C.No.8750/2018 by the Court of VII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bangalore is here by set aside, subject to the petitioner paying a cost of Rs.7,000/- (Rupees Seven Thousand only), which shall be paid to the State Legal Services Authority. Acknowledgement for having paid the cost shall be filed before the trial Court. Without any further notice, the petitioner/complainant shall appear before the trial Court on 14.11.2025, the learned Magistrate shall proceed further with the matter in accordance with law. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE HB/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 72