SRI. B N SHESHASHAYANA v. SRI. R G PRASAD ( R GURUPRASAD)
CRL.RP/715/2020 · 2025-01-09
H P Sandesh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 26184 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 26184 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC:768 CRL.RP No. 715 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.715 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI. B.N.SHESHASHAYANA, S/O. K.H.NAGENDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.67, 1ST MAIN ROAD, VIVEKANANDANAGAR, BSK 3RD STAGE, BANGALORE-560 085. …PETITIONER
(BY SRI. AMSHITH HEGDE H.S., ADVOCATE - ABSENT)
AND:
1.
SRI. R.G. PRASAD (R. GURUPRASAD), S/O. LATE H.R.RAMACHANDRA RAO, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT NO.671, 6TH CROSS, 6TH MAIN, HANUMANTHANAGARA, BAGALORE 560 019. …RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. T.S.GURUNATH, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED 08.09.2020 PASSED BY THE LXIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-70), IN CRL.A.NO.2243/2018, CONFIRMING THE
JUDGMENT DATED 10.10.2018 PASSED BY THE VII ADDL.
JUDGE AND XXXII ADDL.C.M.M., COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU (SCCH-3) IN C.C.NO.19865/2013 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT.
Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC:768 CRL.RP No. 715 of 2020
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
ORAL ORDER
This Court vide order dated 14.12.2020 had directed the petitioner to deposit 30% of the fine amount including the amount already deposited within four weeks. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the said order has not been complied. This Court subsequently passed an order on 16.01.2021 directing the petitioner to deposit additional 20% along with 30% of the fine amount, in all the petitioner was
directed to deposit 50% of the fine amount. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that no such payment is made by the petitioner and also not executed any bond before the Trial Court.
2. Today there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner before this Court. When such being the case, in view of the non-compliance of the order of this Court dated 14.12.2020 and 16.01.2021, the revision petition is dismissed.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48