Mr P Bharath Kumar vs M/S Sharon Systems on 19 July, 2019

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Mr P Bharath Kumar vs M/S Sharon Systems on 19 July, 2019

Bench: Mohammad Nawaz

                         1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY, 2019

                     BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

          CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1391/2018

Between:

Mr. P.Bharath Kumar
Aged about 42 years
S/o P.K.S.Rao
Residing at No.197, Club Avenue Road
LRDE Layout, Karthik Nagar
Bengaluru-560037.                      ... Appellant

(By Sri P.S. Channe Gowda, Advocate)

And:

  1. M/s. Sharon Systems,
     Proprietor: Mr. JoshuaMartyn
     60/4, 11th Avenue, Ashok Nagar
     Chennai-600083.

  2. Mr. Joshua Martyn
     Proprietor: M/s. Sharon Systems
     S/o Samuel Martyn
     Flat No.AF3, Vinoth Viruksha Apartments
     Near Thai Moogambikal College
     Ganga Amnam Street, Nolambur
     Chennai-600107.               ... Respondents

     This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section
378(4) of Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the judgment
dated 11.04.2018 passed by the XIV A.C.M.M.,
Bengaluru in C.C.No.60703/2017-acquitting the
                                    2



respondent/accused for the offence punishable under
Section 138 of N.I. Act and etc.,

      This Criminal Appeal is coming on for Orders,
this day, the Court delivered the following:

                     JUDGMENT

There is no representation for the appellant.

2. The order sheet discloses that on 30.10.2018, notice was issued to the respondents both on main appeal and on interlocutory application. On 14.12.2018, 10.01.2019, 01.02.2019, 21.02.2019, 12.06.2019 and 12.07.2019, though the case was listed, however, there was no representation for the appellant on all those dates. As on today, process fee, appeal memo and I.A. copies for issuance of notice to the respondents are not furnished.

3. This is an appeal filed by the complainant against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial Court, thereby acquitting the accused/respondents for the offence punishable 3 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

4. It appears that the complainant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE ssb

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court