Karnataka High Court
M/S Indocem (India) Pvt. Ltd vs M/S Ravindra Traders on 30 May, 2024
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:18219
CRL.A No. 1383 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MAY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1383 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
M/s. INDOCEM (INDIA) PVT. LTD.
HAVING ITS REGISTERED
SUNDARVAN SOCIETY
ASHRAM ROAD
AHMEDABAD - 380 014.
ALSO AT
No.327/5, NEXT TO BHEL FACTORY
MYSORE ROAD
BENGALURU -560 039.
REPT. BY ITS MANAGER/DIRECTOR
SRI HIRAL MEHTA
S/O MADHUKAR
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI SARAVANA S, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA AND:
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
1. M/s. RAVINDRA TRADERS
VIJAY COMPLEX, DBR COMPOUND
NEAR SARSWATHI THEATER
SEDAM, GULBARGA -585 222.
REPT. BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY.
2. RAVINDRA DONTA
PROPRIETOR
M/s. RAVINDRA TRADERS
VIJAY COMPLEX, DBR COMPOUND
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:18219
CRL.A No. 1383 of 2019
NEAR SARASWATHI THEATER
SEDAM, GULBARGA -585 222.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI BASAVARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2 - ABSENT)
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO
SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF DISMISSAL DATED 19.12.2018,
PASSED BY THE XXV A.C.M.M., AT BENGALURU IN
C.C.NO.26664/2017, ACQUITTING THE
RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF THE
N.I ACT.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the appellant praying to set
aside the order of dismissal dated 19.12.2018 passed in
C.C.No.26664/2017 by the XXV Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru and remand the
matter back to the trial Court to be contested on merits.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant -
complainant. There is no appearance of counsel for the
respondent.
3. The petitioner initiated proceedings
against the respondent for offence punishable under
NC: 2024:KHC:18219
Section 138 of N.I Act and case came to be registered
against the respondent in C.C.No.26664/2017 pending on
the file of the XXV Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bengaluru. After appearance of respondent -
accused and recording plea, the case came to be posted
recording complainant's evidence. Complainant remained
absent on 16.11.2018, 06.12.2018 and 19.12.2018.
Noting absence of the complainant, learned Magistrate has
dismissed the case for non-prosecution on 19.12.2018.
Challenging the said order of dismissal appellant has filed
this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant wound
contends that appellant is Company and said criminal case
was looked by the Manager-Ashwath. The said Manager
left the job and therefore, the Company could not
represent in the said criminal case. In the appeal memo,
the reasons assigned for non appearance of appellant -
complainant before the Trial Court are stated in para No.9.
Which reads thus:
NC: 2024:KHC:18219
"9. The complainant states that he was
represented through his Manager Ashwath, who was
examined as P.W.1 and who was aware of the stage
of proceedings could not be present before this
Hon'ble Court on 16.11.2018 and on further date(s)
of 06/12/2018 and 19.12.2018, as he had left the
Complainant company due to personal reasons and
had not kept the Complainant informed about the
pendency of the case and the current status. Further,
as the counsel of the Complainant had changed his
office during the month of October 2018, he could
not meet his counsel and got updated about the
status of the case. Further, in view of the shifting of
the office, the files were not updated, due to which
the date of hearing went unnoticed. The copy of the
order dated 19.12.2018 in C.C.No.26664/2017
passed by the Hon'ble XXV Addl. Chief Metorpolitan
Magistrate, Bengaluru is produced herewith."
Even though the respondent appeared through
counsel did not controvert said averments made by the
appellant -complainant in para No.9 of the appeal memo.
5. On perusal of the said reasons assigned in para
No.9, appellant has made out case for setting aside the
impugned order of dismissal of case for non-prosecution
on 19.12.2018.
NC: 2024:KHC:18219
6. In the result, the following
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed.
ii) The impugned order dated 19.12.2018 passed
in C.C. No.26664/2017 by the XXV Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru is set
aside. Subject to appellant depositing cost of
Rs.5,000/- before the trial Court and it is
payable to the respondent -accused.
iii) Learned Magistrate is directed to re-open the
said C.C.No.26664/2017 and proceed with
stage of recording of evidence.
iv) Parties are directed to appear before the trial
Court on 01.07.2024.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DSP
