- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010253652019 NC: 2026:KHC:36977 CRL.P No. 6013 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6013 OF 2019 BETWEEN: SRI. ANNADANAPPA R, S/O LATE T.N. RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT NO. 6, ARSUTA NILAYA LAKSHMAMMA RAMAIAH LAYOUT, THALAGHATTAPURA POST, BANGALORE - 62. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DHRUVA KUMARA D.N, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THALAGHATTAPURA POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY HIGH COURT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. 2. SRI. S.N. RAMESH S/O S.V. NARASIMHA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT NO. P93, MGM APP CHIKKALASANDRA, BSK III STAGE BANGALORE - 560 081. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SOWMYA R, HCGP FOR R1) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010253652019 NC: 2026:KHC:36977 CRL.P No. 6013 of 2019 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN PCR NO.439/2017 FILED ON 10.08.2017 BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL RURAL COURT, BENGALURU ORDER DATED 19.08.2017 PASSED BY THE 2nd ACJM, BENGALURU (ANNEXURE A) REFERRING THE COMPLIANT TO TALAGHATAPURA POLICE U/S.156(3) CR.P.C FOR INVESTIGATION REGISTRATION OF CASE IN CR.NO.270/2017 ON 28.09.2017 AT TALAGHATAPURA POLICE STATION THE ENTIRE POLICE INVESTIGATION SUBMISSION OF CHARGE SHEET AND REGISTRATION OF CASE IN C.C.NO.9488/2018 ON 14.11.2018 THE ORDER OF TAKING COGNIZANCE AND ISSUE OF THE PROCESS ETC AGAINST THE PETITIONER BY 2nd ACJM, BENGALURU ETC., (ANNEXURE-C AND ANNEXURE-D). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER None appears for petitioner. On 06.07.2026, matter was adjourned at instance of petitioner on cost and re-listed today. In meanwhile, learned counsel for petitioner has filed Memo for retirement by appending an acknowledgement dated 03.02.2021, which is 5½ years old. Counsel has continued to - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010253652019 NC: 2026:KHC:36977 CRL.P No. 6013 of 2019 represent even after notice of retirement without issuing fresh notice. Therefore, same would not be acceptable. Memo for retirement is rejected. 2. Further filing of memo for retirement cannot be justification for absence. Counsel can retire only with permission of Court. Non-appearance cannot be appreciated and would only mean that petitioner is not diligently pursuing petition. Hence, Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1