Sri Arun @ Arun Prasad Hutagi vs Smt Mangala
2021 Latest Caselaw 2613 Kant

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF JULY 2021

                          BEFORE

THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

  CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.1235 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

Sri Arun @ Arun Prasad Hutagi,
S/o. Andappa Hutagi,
Aged about 40 years,
Manager, TCS Net App,
2nd Floor, Fair Winds Block,
Embassy Golf Links,
Business Park, Challaghatta,
Bengaluru-560 037,

Also at:
Sri Arun @ Arun Prasad Hutagi,
S/o. Andappa Hutagi,
Aged about 40 years,
R/at. Matrupunya,
Beside Kannada Sahitya Parishat,
Jaynagar, Badami Taluk,
Bagalkot District-587201.            .. Petitioner

 ( By Sri Pradeep H.S., Advocate )

AND:

Smt.Mangala,
W/o. Arun @ Arun Prasad Hutagi,
Aged about 32 years,
r/at No.125, Ground Floor,
Nisarga Layout, 1st Cross,
Muddinapalya,
Bengaluru-560 091.                   .. Respondent
                                                   Crl.RP.No.1235/2018
                                   2


       This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section
397(1) of Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the judgment dated
30.06.2018, passed by the LXIII Addl.City Civil and Sessions
Judge (CCH-64), at Bengaluru in Crl.A.No.1291/2016, which is
produced as Annexure-A and to pass/issue such other needy
direction/orders in favour of the petitioner under the
circumstances of the case in the interest of justice an equity.

      This Criminal Revision Petition coming on for Orders
through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing, this day,
the Court made the following:

                              ORDER

None appear for the petitioner either physically or

through Video Conference. No reasons are forthcoming for

non-appearance of the learned counsel for the petitioner. In

spite of granting several and sufficient opportunities, even as

finally, last chance, ultimate chance and once again as an

ultimate chance, still the petitioner has not complied the office

objections in this matter. Several and sufficient opportunities

of not less than six adjournments were granted to him.

On 22.06.2021, this Court made the following

observations:

" Learned counsel for the petitioner is not present.

A perusal of the order sheet would go to show that, several and sufficient opportunities to comply the office objections, as finally and finally again, have already been given to the petitioner, despite Crl.RP.No.1235/2018

which, neither he has complied the office objections nor shown any reason for non-compliance of office objections. However, before proceeding to pass any further order, including dismissal of the petition for non-compliance of office objections, as an ultimate chance, a week's accommodation is granted for compliance of office objections.

If office objections are not complied with in- full within the said period, registry to list this matter on 05-07-2021."

In spite of the above, the petitioner has not complied the

office objections nor even shown any reasons for non-

compliance of office objections within the time granted. Thus,

it is to be inferred that the petitioner is not inclined to

prosecute the matter and in complying the office objections.

Needless to say that, despite Carona Pandemic situation,

the learned counsels were given sufficient opportunity and

accommodation to comply the office objections. Since recently

the COVID-19 restrictions have been substantially relaxed and

the physical appearance of the learned counsels are also being

permitted in the Court, despite the same, the office objections

are not complied with. As such, it has to be inferred that the Crl.RP.No.1235/2018

petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter and also

not complied the office objections.

Accordingly, the Petition stands dismissed for

non-prosecution and also for non-compliance of office

objections.

Sd/-

JUDGE

bk/