Karnataka High Court
M/S Good Coffee Supplies vs M/S Pragathee Coffee And Tea Supply Co on 22 January, 2025
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:2550
CRL.A No. 2175 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2175 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
M/S GOOD COFFEE SUPPLIES
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT No.1/1
5TH MAIN ROAD, CHIKKANNA GARDEN
CHAMARAJAPET
BANGALORE - 560 018.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR
SRI S S PRASHANTH
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI HARINATH M S, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA AND:
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
M/S PRAGATHEE COFFEE AND TEA SUPPLY CO.
HAVING ITS BUSINESS ORGANIZATION
AT:No.99/C, 3RD MAIN ROAD
OPP. VISHWA BHARATHI HOSPITAL
HANUMANTHA NAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 019.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR:
SRI G R SUBRAMANIAM
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. M J ALVA, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) Cr.P.C
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF DISMISSAL OF THE
COMPLAINT ON NON-PROSECUTION PASSED BY THE THE XXI
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:2550
CRL.A No. 2175 of 2018
ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU IN C.C.No.8010/2018-
ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.T. ACT AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is filed by the appellant - complainant
praying to set-aside the order dated 14.11.2018 passed in
C.C.No.8010/2018 by the XXI Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, whereunder, the
complaint of the appellant - complainant came to be
dismissed for non prosecution.
2. The appellant - complainant had initiated the
proceedings against the respondent - accused for the
offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act, 1881 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'N.I.Act'),
and it was pending on the file of the XXI Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.No.8010/2018.
The said case was listed for cross examination of PW1 -
complainant on 14.11.2018. On that day, noting the
NC: 2025:KHC:2550
absence of the appellant - complainant and his counsel,
the complaint came to be dismissed for non prosecution.
The said order has been challenged by the appellant -
complainant in this appeal.
3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant -
complainant and learned counsel for the respondent -
accused. With the consent of both the counsels, even
though the matter is listed for admission, it is taken up for
final disposal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant - complainant
would contend that the appellant - complainant could not
present himself on 14.11.2018 due to puncture of his bike
when he was going along with his counsel on the said bike
and they reached the Court premises late, meanwhile, the
complaint was dismissed for non prosecution. He further
submits that the absence of the appellant - complainant
on that day was for bonafide reason. With this, he prayed
for allowing the appeal and restoration of the criminal
case.
NC: 2025:KHC:2550
5. Learned counsel for the respondent - accused would
contend that the appellant - complainant is not diligent in
prosecuting his case. He was absent on 23.10.2018 and
also on 14.11.2018. Considering the absence of the
appellant - complainant, the learned Magistrate has rightly
dismissed his complaint for non prosecution. With this, he
prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
6. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has
perused the impugned order and the other materials
placed on record.
7. The appellant - complainant had initiated the
proceedings against the respondent - accused for the
offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act and it was
pending on the file of XXI Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.No.8010/2018. The said
case came to be listed on 20.09.2018 for cross
examination of PW1 - complainant. On that day, the
respondent - accused was absent and cross examination
was deferred and the case was ordered to be listed on
NC: 2025:KHC:2550
23.10.2018. On 23.10.2018, the appellant - complainant
was absent and the application has been filed for
exemption of presence of the appellant - complainant and
it was allowed. On that day, the respondent - accused
has changed his counsel and the new counsel has filed the
N.O.C vakalath for the respondent - accused and the case
was adjourned for cross examination to 14.11.2018. On
14.11.2018, the appellant - complainant was absent.
Noting the absence of the appellant - complainant and his
counsel, the complaint came to be dismissed for non
prosecution. In Paragraph 7 of the appeal memo, it is
stated that the appellant - complainant and his counsel
were coming on the bike and it was punctured and
therefore, they could not attend the Court on that day.
The absence of the appellant - complainant on 14.11.2018
is for bonafide reason. Considering the said aspect, the
appellant - complainant has made out case for allowing
the appeal and restoration of the criminal case. In the
result, the following;
NC: 2025:KHC:2550
ORDER
The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated
14.11.2018 passed in C.C.No.8010/2018 by the XXI
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru is set-
aside and the criminal case is ordered to be restored. The
appellant - complainant and the respondent - accused are
directed to appear before the Trial Court on 25.02.2025,
without awaiting for any Court notice.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
GH
