- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1046 CRL.A No. 100066 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100066 OF 2023 (A) BETWEEN: YERRISWAMY S/O BASAPPA NAGAPPALA AGE. 46 YEARS, OCC. SOCIAL SERVICE, R/O. NO.16, GURUKULAM, SHANTINIKETAN NAGAR, GOA ROAD, DHARWAD-580008. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. SUSHMA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. H.N. HANCHINAMANI, ADVOCATE) AND: BASAVARAJ S/O SHIVAPUTRAPPA ANGADI AGE ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. YERIKOPPA, TQ. DIST. DHARWAD-580007. …RESPONDENT (NOTICE SERVED TO RESPONDENT) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 378(4) CR.P.C., IS SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 06.01.2022 PASSED BY THE 2ND ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND 2ND JMFC DHARWAD, IN PCR NO. 21/2018 AND RESTORE THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT FILED UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I ACT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1046 CRL.A No. 100066 of 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Smt. Sushma learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri. H. N. Hanchinamani, learned counsel for the appellant. 2. The present appeal is filed under Section 378(4) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with the following prayer: “Wherefore, the appellant most humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 06.04.2022 passed by the 2nd Addl. Civil Judge and 2nd JMFC, Dharwad, in PCR No.21/2018 and restore the private complaint filed under Section 138 of N.I. Act, in the interest of justice and equity.” 3. The appellant is the complainant whose private complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution. Subsequently, a revision petition was filed against that - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1046 CRL.A No. 100066 of 2023 dismissal, which was also dismissed by the Revisional Court. Therefore, the appellant is before this Court. 4. learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the Trial Magistrate committed a grave error in dismissing the petition for non prosecution, inasmuch as, the procedure adopted by the learned Trial Magistrate is incorrect in all the principles of law enunciated in the case of Indian Bank Association and Others Vs. Union of India and Others1 by the Hon’ble Apex Court. 5. She would further contend that there was no necessity to record sworn statement and when once the complaint with necessary documents is filed before the Court, the next stage is to take cognizance and summon the accused and therefore dismissing the case for non- prosecution has resulted in grave miscarriage of justice and sought for allowing the petition. 1 (2014) 5 SCC 590 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1046 CRL.A No. 100066 of 2023 6. Respondent served with the notice and unrepresented. 7. Having noted that the learned Trial Magistrate has adopted a wrong procedure and dismissed the case for non-prosecution, following the directions of the Hon'ble Apex Court enunciated in the case of Indian Bank Association and Others (supra), a case is made out to set aside the impugned order and restore the complaint for further consideration. 8. Accordingly, the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed. (ii) Consequently, order dated 06.04.2022 is hereby set aside and the complaint is restored to the file and shall be decided strictly in accordance with the directions issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1046 CRL.A No. 100066 of 2023 case of Indian Bank Association and Others Vs. Union of India and Others. Order accordingly. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE SMM Ct-cmu LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 26