- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4756 CRL.RP No. 100235 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100235 OF 2023 (397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: KATAGI JAMBAIAH NAYAKA S/O. KATIGI HANUMANTHAPPA, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. 32ND WARD, TAILVARKERI, HOSPETE, VIJAYANAGAR. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH HOSAPETE POLICE STATION, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011. 2. BMM ISPAT LTD A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 114, GANAPURA VILLAGE, HOSAPETE, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR-583201. V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Date: 2025.03.18 15:26:36 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4756 CRL.RP No. 100235 of 2023 3. DINESH KUMAR SINGHI S/O. LATE UDAICHAND SINGHI, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC. DIRECTOR, BMM ISPAT, 114 GANAPURA VILLAGE, HOSAPETE, DISTRICT: VIJAYANAGAR-583201. 4. G. LAKSHIMINARAYANA S/O. CHINNA THIMMAPPA, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC. DIRECTOR, 114, GANAPURA VILLAGE, HOSAPETE, DISTRICT: VIJAYANAGAR-583201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1; SRI CHETHAN MUNNOLLI, ADVOCATE SRI. K. DHIRAJ KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2, R3 AND R4) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 397 R/W. SEC. 401 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS OF THE COURTS BELOW AND ALLOW THIS REVISION PETITION AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 21.09.2022 PASSED IN CRL.R.P. NO. 5005/2021 ON THE FILE OF III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JDUGE, BALLARI, SITTING AT HOSAPETE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4756 CRL.RP No. 100235 of 2023 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Sri.Srinivas B. Naik, learned counsel for the revision petitioner, Sri.Praveena Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri.Chetan Munnoli, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 4. 2. Though matter is listed for orders with regard to the office objections, taking note of the fact that based on the protest petition filed by the revision petitioner, trial magistrate has rejected ‘B’ report and wanted to proceed with the case based on the protest petition. Said order was questioned by the accused before the first appellate court by filing the revision petition. 3. Learned judge in the first appellate Court noted that rejection of the ‘B’ report is improper and remitted the matter for fresh consideration to the very same magistrate in accordance with law. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4756 CRL.RP No. 100235 of 2023 4. Said order of first appellate Court is sought to be assailed by the revision petitioner in this revision petition by the de-facto complainant. 5. Having heard the arguments of Sri.Srinivas B. Naik and Sri.Chetan Munnoli,, this Court is of the considered opinion that the learned judge in the first appellate Court has rightly exercised the revisional powers in setting aside the order of trial magistrate rejecting the ‘B’ report and taking cognizance. As such learned judge in the first appellate Court directed that matter to be considered by the learned trial magistrate afresh in accordance with law in the light of the observations made by the first appellate court in the revision petition, by following the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Vasanti Dubey Vs State Of M.P 1. 6. Accordingly, this court is of the considered opinion that no interference is called for in this revision petition. 1 2012 (2) SCC 731 - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4756 CRL.RP No. 100235 of 2023 7. However, it should be observed that all contentions available to the de-facto complainant and accused should be kept open while readjucating the matter. 8. With that observation, following order is passed. ORDER Criminal revision petition is meritless and hereby dismissed. SD/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE AC CT:PA LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 3