Karnataka High Court
CRL.A/1273/2023 of SRI NAGABHUSHANA E Vs SRI K M KARUNAKARA @RANJITH on 24 June 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:31405 CRL.A No. 1273 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1273 OF 2023 BETWEEN: SRI. NAGABHUSHANA E., S/O LATE ELEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT NO.04, HAVANOOR
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:31405
CRL.A No. 1273 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1273 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
SRI. NAGABHUSHANA E.,
S/O LATE ELEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/AT NO.04,
HAVANOOR EXTENSION,
HESARGHATTA MAIN ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 073.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. KRISHNE GOWDA C., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))
AND:
SRI. K.M.KARUNAKARA @ RANJITH,
S/O SRI.MAGANNA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
R/AT NO.12, 1ST CROSS,
1ST MAIN, MUNIKONDAPPA LAYOUT,
NAGASANDRA POST,
BENGALURU - 560 073.
…RESPONDENT
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(4) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 11.05.2021
PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.123/2018 BY THE HONBLE LIX ADDL.
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY FOR
DISMISSING THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE XX ACMM,
Digitally
signed by
SUSHMA
LAKSHMI B
S
Location:
High Court
of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:31405
CRL.A No. 1273 of 2023
BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.6670/2017 DATED 23.12.2017 FOR
THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I ACT AS PRAYED FOR IN THE
COMPLAINT, BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND AWARD COST OF
THE PROCEEDINGS.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
In spite of granting sufficient time, office objections have still not been complied with.
2. The matter is listed today for the fifth time. Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. Apparently, the appellant is not interested in pursuing the matter.
3. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed for non- compliance of office objections and non-prosecution.
Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE
HR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1