Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25364 (KAR)

SMT SAVITHA GURURAJ v. SMT MAHADEVI K BYADAGI

CRL.P/6299/2025 · 2025-04-26

Hemant Chandangoudar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17338 CRL.P No. 6299 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6299 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SMT. SAVITHA GURURAJ, W/O GURURAJ, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT PRIDE ENCHANTA, 503, 320, H' BLOCK, MYSORE ROAD, OPP. BHEL RANG ANATHAN COLONY, NAYANDAHALLI, BANGALORE. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUBRAMANYA H.V, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. MAHADEVI K. BYADAGI, W/O K. BYADAGI, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 2362, I MAIN ROAD, 4TH CROSS, VIJAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 40. …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C (U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 08.04.2025 PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.605/2025, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BANGALORE (CCH-64), THEREBY ALLOW I.A.NO.2 FILED U/S 430 OF BNSS, 2023, THEREBY SUSPEND THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17338 CRL.P No. 6299 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER The petitioner, who has been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act, filed an appeal before the learned Sessions Court along with an application for condonation of delay and suspension of sentence under Section 430 of the BNSS, 2023. 2. The trial Court issued notice on the application for condonation of delay. The petitioner's grievance is that the Sessions Court has not suspended the sentence, and a warrant has been issued. The petitioner contends that she is entitled for suspension of the sentence. The trial Court has passed the judgment of conviction based on the testimonies of the complainant and the petitioner/accused. Although PW.1 was cross examined, the petitioner has neither led any defence evidence nor addressed her arguments. In such circumstances, the petitioner contends that she is entitled for suspension of sentence awarded by the Trial Court, pending admission of its appeal. ORDER i. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. ii. The order dated 08.04.2025 passed by the Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore in - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17338 CRL.P No. 6299 of 2025 Crl.A.No.605/2025 on I.A.No.2/2025 is hereby set aside and I.A is allowed. iii. The judgment and order of sentence dated 04.01.2025 passed by the XXII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore in C.C.No.3884/2023 is suspended and the petitioner is enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions: a) Petitioner shall deposit 10% of the Cheque amount within four weeks from today, failing which the suspension of sentence automatically stands vacated. b) Subject to furnishing cash surety for a sum of Rs.50,000/-. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE TIN, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 109 CT: BHK * Page No.3 is retyped and replaced vide chamber order dated 29.04.2025.