Sri. Mithun R v. Sri. C. Pavan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 824 OF 2026 (397(CR.PC) / 438(BNSS)) BETWEEN:

SRI. MITHUN R S/O J RAMACHANDRAIAH AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT RAMAPURA VILLAGE VIRGONAGARA POST BIDARAHALLI HOBLI BENGALURU EAST TALUK BENGALURU 560 049. …PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SHANKAR BASAWARAJ., ADVOCATE) AND:

SRI. C. PAVAN S/O G CHANDRASHEKAR REDDY AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT OLD NO.858/1, NEW NO.2 2ND CROSS, SUBBAYYANAPALYA BANASAWADI MAIN ROAD BENGALURU 560 033. …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.GURUVA REDDY., ADVOCATE)

by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C (U/S 438 R/W 442 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED: 01.04.2026 THEREIN CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED: 02.04.2024 IN CC.NO.54803/2023 ON THE FILE OF XIV ACMM COURT, MAYO HALL UNIT, AT BENGALURU, SAID CRIMINAL CASE BE DISMISSED AND PETITIONER BE ACQUITTED OF THE CHARGES U/S 138 OF N.I ACT.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

ORAL ORDER

¶1This Court vide order dated 21.05.2026 suspended the sentence subject to petitioner depositing further 30% of the fine amount before the Trial Court within a period of four weeks and the same has not been deposited. Thereafter, an application i.e., I.A.2/2026 was filed seeking extension of time. On 30.06.2026, for the reason stated in the affidavit, I.A.2/2026 was allowed and one week time was granted to deposit the amount and ordered to list the matter on 09.07.2026. Thereafter, when the

matter was listed before this Court on 09.07.2026, one more application was filed seeking extension of time. Hence, this Court granted one week time and has taken note of the fact that on previous occasion also one week time was granted and accordingly, directed the revision petitioner to deposit the amount within one week from

09.07.2026 and also referred the matter to the Lok Adalath and even directed both parties to be present on the said date and if the matter is not settled before the Lok Adalath, ordered to list the matter before this Court on

21.07.2026.

¶2Even though this Court directed and extended time twice to deposit the amount, the order is not complied with. Hence, no grounds are made out to entertain this revision petition in view of non-compliance of the order. Even when the matter was referred to the Lok Adalath, the same was not settled. Hence, it is clear that the revision petitioner is not diligent in complying with the order passed by this Court even when lenience was shown by

this Court twice by extending the time to deposit the amount.

¶3Under the circumstances, no ground is made out to consider this revision petition in view of violation of the conditional order and also non compliance of the order and also the revision petition is not yet admitted and no grounds are found to entertain the same.

¶4Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.

Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE

DM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 32