Ganapati S/O Durgappa Naik vs Laxmi W/O Madev Naik
2022 Latest Caselaw 946 Kant

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                    DHARWAD BENCH

    DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

                          BEFORE

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

        CRIMINAL APPEAL No.100045 OF 2015
Between :

Ganapati,
S/o.Durgappa Naik,
Aged about 51 years,
R/o. Challasaramane,
Chitrapura,
Shirali-2 Village,
Tq: Bhatkal,
Dist: Uttara Kannada.                         .. Appellant

 ( By Sri Ganapati M. Bhat, Advocate )

And :

Smt.Laxmi,
W/o Madev Naik,
Aged about 37 years,
R/o Kollimane,
Near Nichalamakki Venkatraman Temple,
Asarkeri Post,
Tq: Bhatkal,
Dist: Uttara Kannada.                         .. Respondent

 ( By Sri D.J.Naik, Advocate )

      This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378(4) of
Cr.P.C. praying to set aside judgment and order of acquittal
dated 18.02.2015, passed by the Court of the Prl.Civil Judge
& J.M.F.C., at Bhatkal, in C.C.No.247/2013, for an offence
                                            Crl.A.No.100045/2015
                              2


punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act,
1881, and convict the respondent for charge levelled against
him, in the interest of justice.

      This Criminal Appeal is coming on for Hearing through
Video Conference this day, the Court made the following :

                           ORDER

Called again in the afternoon. None appear in this

matter even through virtual mode.

2. A perusal of the material placed before this Court

would go to show that this is an appeal filed by the

complainant seeking setting aside of the impugned judgment

passed by the trial Court acquitting the present respondent

for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881 and seeking her conviction.

3. The appeal is of the year 2015, whereas, the

Criminal Case in the trial Court was of the year 2013, as

such, it is nine years old matter. In spite of granting several

and sufficient opportunities, even as final opportunity also,

the appellant has not proceeded further in the matter and

addressed his arguments.

Crl.A.No.100045/2015

4. Since on the ground of alleged attempts for settlement

also, sufficient adjournment was granted to the parties, this Court

on 17.01.2022 has made the following observations :

" None appear in the matter either physically or through Video Conference.

A perusal of the order sheet would go to show that this appeal is of the year 2015 and till date, the appellant has not addressed his arguments.

On 27.09.2021, the learned counsel for the appellant had remained absent, however, learned counsel for the respondent had submitted that the settlement negotiations were under progress. In spite of the same, neither any settlement is reported nor the appellant is proceeding further in addressing his arguments in the matter.

As such, making it clear that, in case the appellant fails to proceed further in this matter on the next date of hearing, the Court may proceed to pass appropriate orders, including dismissal of the appeal, as a final opportunity, a short accommodation is granted.

List this matter on 20.01.2022."

In spite of the above, neither of the parties have

appeared in the matter nor shown any reasons for their

non-appearance. As such, they did not proceed further in Crl.A.No.100045/2015

the matter either by reporting settlement or by addressing

their arguments.

5. Though a Criminal Appeal would not generally be

dismissed for non-prosecution, however, the present appeal

is not against the judgment of conviction, but, it is against

the judgment of acquittal, that too, for an alleged offence

punishable under Section 138 of N.I.Act. Thus, when the

complainant himself is not interested in prosecuting the

appeal, there is no point in keeping this old appeal, which

actually originates from the Criminal Case of the year 2013,

still pending on the file. As such, the appeal can be

dismissed for non-prosecution.

6. Though the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)

dated 18.01.2022 is in force, it has only mandated for

conducting of Court proceedings through virtual mode.

It no where gives any exemption from appearance of the

learned counsels in the matter through virtual mode and

proceeding further in the matter by addressing their

arguments.

Crl.A.No.100045/2015

7. So when the matter is listed for final hearing, after

considering the guidelines issued under prevailing SOP, it

was required by the learned counsel for the appellant to

appear virtually and proceed further in this appeal by

addressing his arguments. Since showing no reasons, the

appellant through his counsel has remained absent, the

Appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

bk/