Sri. Siddheshwar S/O. Malhari Kadam vs Sri. Raju S/O. Bapu Gundapikar
2025 Latest Caselaw 2293 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Sri. Siddheshwar S/O. Malhari Kadam vs Sri. Raju S/O. Bapu Gundapikar on 6 August, 2025

Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty

Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty

                                             -1-
                                                        NC: 2025:KHC-D:9955
                                                   CRL.A No. 100120 of 2025


            HC-KAR



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
                     DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
                                       BEFORE
                   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100120 OF 2025 (A)
            BETWEEN:

            SRI. SIDDHESHWAR S/O. MALHARI KADAM
            AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. SEPOY-ARMY,
            R/O. NO.4768/A, LAXMI NAGAR,
            MACHCHE, BELAGAVI,
            TQ. AND DIST. BELAGAVI,
            PIN-590 014, NOW AT GATE NO.1,
            ARMY SADILAPUR TRANSIT CAMP,
            MAIN ROAD, GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR,
            JALUKBARI, GUWAHATI, ASSAM-781 014.
                                                                ... APPELLANT
            (BY SRI. S.B. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

            AND:

            SRI. RAJU S/O. BAPU GUNDAPIKAR,
            AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
            R/O. RUMEWADI VILLAGE,
            TAL. KHANAPUR, DIST. BELAGAVI,
RAKESH      PIN-591 120.
S                                                             ... RESPONDENT
HARIHAR     (BY SRI. SANJAY S. KATAGERI, ADVOCATE)

Location:          THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378 (4) OF
HIGH        THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE R/W SECTION 419 (4) OF THE
COURT OF    BHARATIYA NAGARIKA SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 PRAYING TO CALL
KARNATAKA   FOR RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09.12.2024
            PASSED BY THE J.M.F.C.-V, BELAGAVI IN C.C. NO.1179/2022
            THEREBY DISMISSING THE C.C. FOR NON-PROSECUTION AND
            ACQUITTING      THE   ACCUSED/RESPONDENT      FOR    OFFENCE
            PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF NI ACT BY ALLOWING THE
            PRESENT APPEAL AND RESTORE C.C. NO.1179/2022 TO ORIGINAL
            FILE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

                 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
            JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
                             -2-
                                        NC: 2025:KHC-D:9955
                                  CRL.A No. 100120 of 2025


HC-KAR




                     ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

1. Appellant/complainant is before this Court

challenging the order dated 09.12.2024 passed by the

Court of JMFC-V, Belagavi in C.C.No.1179 of 2022,

wherein the respondent/accused has been acquitted and

the complaint has been dismissed for non-prosecution.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. Appellant had initiated proceedings against the

respondent for offence punishable under Section 138 of

the Negotiable Instruments Act before the Court of JMFC-

V, Belagavi and after taking cognizance of the alleged

offence, the accused was being tried before the trial Court

in C.C.No.1179 of 2022. It appears that the appellant had

examined himself as PW1 and since he was not cross-

examined, the matter was posted for the purpose of

defence evidence. At that stage, application was filed on

behalf of respondent to recall PW1 for the purpose of his

cross-examination. The said application was allowed.

NC: 2025:KHC-D:9955

HC-KAR

However, PW1 had not kept him present before the trial

Court on the dates of hearing and it is under these

circumstances the order impugned was passed.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted

that the appellant is serving as a Soldier in Indian Army

and it is under these circumstances he could not appear

before the trial Court for the purpose of his cross-

examination. He submits that he was earlier prosecuting

the complaint diligently and it was only after PW1 was

recalled, he had not appeared before the trial Court. I find

some force in the contentions raised on behalf of the

appellant. If an opportunity of prosecuting the complaint

on merits is not given to the appellant, he will be put to

hardship and his case is likely to be prejudiced. Under the

circumstances, I am of the opinion that the order

impugned passed by the trial Court, dismissing the

complaint for non-prosecution and thereby acquitting the

respondent needs to be set aside. Accordingly, the

following:

NC: 2025:KHC-D:9955

HC-KAR

ORDER

i. Criminal Appeal is allowed.

ii. The order dated 09.12.2024 passed by the

Court of JMFC-V, Belagavi in C.C.No.1179 of

2022 dismissing the complaint for non-

prosecution and thereby acquitting the

accused is set aside and the complaint is

restored to file.

iii. The trial Court is directed to proceed further,

in accordance with law.

iv. The parties or their representatives are

directed to appear before the trial Court on

01.09.2025.

Sd/-

(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

KGK CT:BCK