Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Mr P Bharath Kumar vs M/S Sharon Systems on 15 November, 2022

                          1


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                        BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

          CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1389 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

MR P BHARATH KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
S/O P K S RAO
RESIDING AT #197,
CLUB AVENUE ROAD
LRDE LAYOUT
KARTHIK NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 037
                              ... COMPLAINANT/APPELLANT

(BY SRI. CHANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE - ABSENT)

AND:

1.   M/S SHARON SYSTEMS
     PROPRIETOR: MR JOSHUA MARTYN
     60/4, 11TH AVENUE
     ASHOK NAGAR
     CHENNAI - 600 083
     email [email protected]

2.   MR JOSHUA MARTYN
     PROPRIETOR: M/S SHARON SYSTEMS
     S/O SAMUEL MARTYN
     FLAT NO.AF3, VINOTH VIRUKSHA APARTMENTS
     NEAT THAI MOOGAMBIKAL COLLEGE
     GANGA AMNAM STREET
     NOLAMBUR
     CHENNAI - 600 107
     email:[email protected]


                                 ...ACCUSED/RESPONDENT
                              2



     THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) OF THE
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO a) SET ASIDE
THE ORDER AND JUDGMENT DATED 11.04.2018 PASSED IN
C.C.NO.60703/2017 BY THE HON'BLE XIV ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, MAYO HALL, BENGALURU; b)
REVERSE THE ORDER OF ACQUITTAL INTO CONVICTION; c)
PASS CUH ORDERS/GRANT SUCH RELIEF AS THIS HON'BLE
COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

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


                     JUDGMENT

No representation for the appellant.

2. Even in the afternoon session, there is no representation for the appellant.

3. Vide order dated 31.10.2022, as a last chance, this appeal is posted today for taking necessary steps, with a condition that if needful is not done, necessary orders would be passed for dismissal of appeal.

4. However, needful is not done. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. 3

Hence, appeal is dismissed for default of not complying with the office objections.

Sd/-

JUDGE MDS