- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010101432021 NC: 2026:KHC:45990 CRL.P No. 2068 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2068 OF 2021 BETWEEN: SRI GIRISH GOWDA S/O LATE G.RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT NO.153, 4TH MAIN ROAD, GELEYARA BALAGA, MUNESHWARA BLOCK, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM, BENGALURU - 560 086. …PETITIONER [BY SRI V D RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE (PH)] AND: SRI K M UDAY S/O MADAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO.4/204, VISHAL PALACE, 1ST CROSS, MALLESHWARAM, BENGLAURU - 560 003. …RESPONDENT [BY SRI SANDEEP LAHIRI, ADVOCATE A/W SMT. DEEPIKA JOSHI, ADVOVATE (PH)] THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH/SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09.02.2021 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGLAURU (CCH-65) IN CRL.RP.NO.989/2018. Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010101432021 NC: 2026:KHC:45990 CRL.P No. 2068 of 2021 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER Challenging Order dated 09.02.2021 passed by LXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, (CCH-65), Bangalore, in Crl.RP. no.989/2018, this petition is filed. 2. Sri VD Raviraj, learned counsel for petitioner raised a short and substantive preliminary ground against impugned order, that a private complaint filed by respondent for offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was registered as CC no.14208/2015 on file of XVIII ACMM, Bangalore. On 08.11.2017, same was dismissed for non-prosecution on account of absence of complainant for cross-examination. Consequently, petitioner-accused stood acquitted. Though an appeal would be maintainable against an order of acquittal, respondent had preferred a criminal revision petition and under impugned order without noticing availability of an appeal and non-maintainability of revision as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of VK Bhat v. G Ravi Kishore - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010101432021 NC: 2026:KHC:45990 CRL.P No. 2068 of 2021 and Anr. reported in (2016) 13 SCC 243, learned Revisional Court allowed revision, set aside order and restored proceedings before trial Court. In view of same, learned counsel prayed for allowing petition. 3. Sri Sandeep Lahiri, learned counsel for respondent- complainant submitted that an order of dismissal of criminal proceedings for default was set aside and proceedings restored by imposing cost, except of on technicality, same would be justified. Alternatively it was submitted in case impugned order were set aside, liberty may be reserved to complainant to avail appropriate remedy. 4. Heard learned counsel. Perused impugned order and material on record. 5. Dismissal of CC no.14208/2015 for default for non- appearance of complainant on 08.11.2017 is not in dispute. Against said order, complainant preferred revision. Impugned order is passed in said revision. Hon'ble Supreme Court in VK Bhat's case has held that an order of dismissal of criminal proceedings for default would as a consequence lead to - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010101432021 NC: 2026:KHC:45990 CRL.P No. 2068 of 2021 acquittal of accused and against order of acquittal, an appeal would be maintainable and had set aside order passed in revision petition. In view of said ratio, impugned order would be unsustainable. 6. Consequently, petition is allowed, order dated 09.02.2021 passed by LXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, (CCH-65), Bangalore, in Crl.RP. no.989/2018 is set aside, but reserving liberty to respondent- complainant to avail remedy of appeal in accordance with law. It would only be appropriate to state further that time spent in revision petition as well as this petition would inure to complainant for purpose of Section 14 of Limitation Act,1963. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE YKL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23