Sri. Vasanth Kumar vs Smt. Esther D Souza
2022 Latest Caselaw 10902 Kant

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2022

                             BEFORE

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

 CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.566 OF 2017

BETWEEN:

Sri. Vasanth Kumar,
Aged about 46 years,
R/at No.2/3, 11th Cross,
Chowdappa Layout,
Bapujinagara,
Mysore Road,
Bengaluru - 560026.
                                                      ... petitioner
(By Smt. Nagarathnamma K.N., Advocate)

AND:

Smt. Esther D'Souza
W/o. Sri. Anthony D'Souza,
Aged about 52 years,
R/at No.402, ALPS Block,
Unite Heritage,
Doddaballapra Road,
Yelahanka,
Bengaluru -560064.
                                                     .. Respondent
(By Sri. B. Keshava Murthy, Advocate)

                                  ****
   This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to call for entire
records and set aside the order of conviction and sentence and
fine imposed by the learned XVIII Addl.Chief Metropolitan
                                                 Crl.R.P.No.566/2017
                               2


Magistrate, Bengaluru vide judgment dated 26-10-2015 passed
in C.C.No.13133/2013 and further be pleased to set aside the
judgment passed by the learned 56th Addl. City Civil and
Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in Crl.Appeal No.1368/2015, vide
judgment dated 19-04-2017, in the interest of justice and equity.

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

                          ORDER

None appear in this matter, either physically or

through video conference.

Even though the learned counsel for the petitioner got

this matter listed by moving a memo for posting, still, she

has failed to appear and address her argument in this

matter. Thus, the petitioner has prevented the other

eligible matter from being listed today. In view of the fact

that in spite of the matter being listed, the petitioner has

failed to appear in the matter which is of the year 2017,

wherein the criminal case is of the year 2013, I am of the

view that petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the

matter.

Crl.R.P.No.566/2017

Though the criminal petition would not be generally

dismissed for non-prosecution, however, it is a case where

the accused has challenged the confirmation of his

conviction by the Sessions Judge's Court for the offence

punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments

Act, 1881. Hence, due to the non-appearance of the

learned counsel for the petitioner, in spite of getting the

matter listed, the present revision petition stands dismissed

for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

BMV*