LAWS(KAR)-2009-10-30

K H GANESH RAO Vs. H GOPAL

Decided On October 06, 2009
K. H. GANESH RAO Appellant
V/S
H. GOPAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed under Sec. 378(4) of Cr. P. C. by the complainant in C. C. No. 308/2005 on the file of the learned Civil Judge(Jr. Dn.) and JMFC Shikaripura, District Shimoga (hereinafter referred to as 'Trial Court' for short). The respondent herein, who was the accused in the said criminal case, came to be convicted by the Trial Court for the offence under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act ('N. I. Act' for short) by its judgment and order of conviction dt. 6-10-2006. Aggrieved by the same the respondent accused preferred Criminal Appeal No. 111/2006 before the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Shimoga (hereinafter referred to as 'Appellate Court'). The Appellate Court, by its impugned judgment and order passed in the said appeal allowed the said appeal of the accused, reversed the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court and thereby acquitted the respondent - accused, of the said offence. Therefore, the complainant has challenged the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the Appellate Court in the said appeal.

(2.) The respondent accused has remained absent despite receipt of notice of this appeal. Therefore he is unrepresented.

(3.) Since the present appeal is filed under Section 378 (4) of Cr. P. C. aggrieved by the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the 'Appellate Court' in the appeal that was filed by the accused challenging the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Trial Court, the question that has arisen is "whether the present appeal is maintainable under Sec. 378(4) of Cr. P. C?" Therefore, arguments of Sri. C. H. Jadhav, the learned counsel for the appellant are heard on this question. Many other similar appeals are pending before this Bench. Crl. A. Nos. 905/ 2008 and 1057/2008 are two of such appeals and they are also listed today. Arguments of the learned advocates for both the sides in Crl. A. No. 905/2008 and also arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant in Crl. A. No. 1057/2008 are also heard on this question of maintainability of these appeals. But this order on the said question is passed in Crl. A. No. 173/2009 only and the same shall have to be followed in all other similar pending appeals including the said two appeals.