- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1251 CRL.P No. 11161 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11161 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI. S.D. UDAYA KUMAR, PROP. B.S.D FINANCERS, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, S/O LATE BS DORAISWAMY CHETTIAR, OFFICE AT NO.36/2, HAUDIN ROAD, ULSOOR, BANGALORE - 560 042. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVIKUMARA B.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY LD. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001. COMMERCIAL STREET POLICE STATION, SHIVAJINAGAR. 2. SRI. UMESH K.B AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS S/O LATE C.BORAIAH WORKING AT SUPERINTENDENT METRO STATION TRINITY CIRCLE, MG ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001 Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1251 CRL.P No. 11161 of 2025 RESIDING AT NO.26 16TH CROSS, BANGALKUNTE BANGALORE - 560 076. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 19.04.2025 PASSED BY THE HONBLE 14TH ACMM MAYOHALL BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.55213/2024 AND CONSECUTIVELY RESTORE THE COMPLAINT FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 19.04.2025, passed by the 14th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, in C.C.No.55213/2024, by which, a complaint filed by the petitioner comes to be rejected or the petition is dismissed for its non-prosecution. 2. Heard Sri Ravikumara B.R., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K. Nageshwarappa, learned counsel for the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1251 CRL.P No. 11161 of 2025 respondent No.1. As respondent No.2 is only a formal party, notice to respondent No.2 is not issued. 3. The petitioner is the complainant, respondent No.2 is the accused. A transaction between respondent No.2 and the petitioner goes wrong as the cheques that were issued by respondent No.1 are dishonoured. The complainant approached the concerned Court invoking Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. for the offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Sworn statement of the petitioner was recorded on 22.04.2024 and summons was issued to the accused. Even after six dates granted by the concerned Court, the petitioner does not appear and the steps are not taken. The concerned Court rejects the complaint or dismisses the complaint for its non-prosecution. The dates are as follows: “06.07.2024 Issue Summons to accused by hand & RPAD by 22.11.2024 if process is furnished. Sd/- 22.11.2024 SS PF not Paid Issue S/S if PF paid. By 03.02.2025 Sd/- 03.02.2025 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1251 CRL.P No. 11161 of 2025 SS None present. Steps not taken. Steps 21.02.2025. Sd/- 21.02.2025 For Steps None present. Steps not taken. Steps finally 22.03.2025 Sd/- 22.03.2025 Steps None present. Steps Not taken. Steps last chance. 19.04.2025 Sd/- 19.04.2025 Steps” The impugned order dated 19.04.2025 reads as follows: “Case called twice. No representation for complainant. Complainant is also absent. Process fee not paid. Sufficient opportunities granted to furnish process. Hence, complainant is dismissed for default. Sd/- 19.04.2025 XIV ACJM, Bengaluru.” The matter is listed between 06.07.2024 to 22.03.2025 for taking steps on four occasions. The petitioner was not present and the steps were not taken. The concerned Court left with no choice was constrained to dismiss the petition for its non-prosecution. The petitioner has called in question the said order before this Court in the subject petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1251 CRL.P No. 11161 of 2025 However, if there to be an order passed under Section 256 of the Cr.P.C., which would amount to an acquittal of an accused in a criminal case, it would be altogether a different circumstance. The case at hand did not travel beyond the summons being issued as the petitioner did not take steps. For issuance of summons. Therefore, it is not where the accused can be declared to be acquitted. It is a plain and simple dismissal for default. In such circumstances, the petition would become entertainable and the petitioner need not avail the remedy of filing an appeal. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to grant one opportunity to the petitioner to take steps, for service of summons upon the accused. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER a. The criminal petition is allowed. b. The order dated 19.04.2025, passed by the 14th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate in C.C.No.55213/2024 stands quashed. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1251 CRL.P No. 11161 of 2025 c. C.C.No.55213/2024 is restored to file, with a direction that the matter be listed before the concerned Court on 10.02.2026, on which day, the petitioner be given a last chance to take steps for issuance of summons to the accused. d. In the event the petitioner is not present on the said day, it is open for the concerned Court to pass necessary orders in accordance with law, as this would be last straw of opportunity to the petitioner. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE nvj List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21