Prakash S/O Rachappa Biradar vs Subashchandra S/O Keshavrao Gada
2023 Latest Caselaw 6263 Kant

                                              -1-
                                                    NC: 2023:KHC-K:6935
                                                    CRL.A No. 200050 of 2023




                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                    KALABURAGI BENCH

                      DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

                                           BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T


                      CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 200050 OF 2023 (378)
                   BETWEEN:

                       PRAKASH
                       S/O. RACHAPPA BIRADAR
                       AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: RTO EMPLOYEE,
                       R/O. H.NO. 8-1197,
                       BAMBOO BAZAR,
                       KALABURAGI.

                                                                ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SRI. K. A. KALBURGI, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed   AND:
by SHILPA R
TENIHALLI
Location: HIGH         SUBASHCHANDRA
COURT OF               S/O. KESHAVRAO GADA
KARNATAKA
                       AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
                       R/O. H.NO. 8-1174,
                       NETAJI NAGAR,
                       NEHARU GUNJ,
                       KALABURAGI.

                                                              ...RESPONDENT
                            -2-
                                  NC: 2023:KHC-K:6935
                                  CRL.A No. 200050 of 2023




     THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S. 378(4) OF CR.P.C., PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED: 05-01-2023 PASSED BY
THE IV ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC IN C.C. NO. 1955/2021.

    THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                        JUDGMENT

None appear for the appellant.

Office objections have not been complied, in spite of

granting several opportunities. The learned counsel for

the appellant has remained absent on 02.08.2023 and

today. It shows that the appellant is not interested in

prosecuting the appeal.

Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance of

office objections.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SRT