Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 47664 (KAR)

BASAVARAJ S/O NAGAPPA PUJAR v. SHIVAPPA S/O YALLAPPA PUJAR

CRL.RP/100093/2018 · 2025-03-27

V Srishananda

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5706 CRL.RP No. 100093 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100093 OF 2018 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: BASAVARAJ S/O. NAGAPPA PUJAR, AGE: MAJOR, OCC. AGRICULTURE, RESIDENT OF HANCHINAL TALUKA, KUNDGOL. …PETITIONER (BY SRI L.S. SULLAD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHIVAPPA S/O. YALLAPPA PUJAR, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, RESIDENT OF HANCHINAL TALUKA, KUNDGOL. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY HIGH COURT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, KUNDGOL POLICE. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R2; SRI K.L.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W. 401 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT ORDER IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.36/2016 DATED 07.10.2017 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HUBBALLI AND CONFIRM THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE JMFC COURT, KUNDGOL, DHARWAD IN CC NO.187/2011 CONVICTING THE ACCUSED NO.1 & 2/RESPONDENT 1 U/S. 324, 506 R/W. 34 IPC AND CALL FOR THE LCR. V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Date: 2025.03.29 11:51:19 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5706 CRL.RP No. 100093 of 2018 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) At request of the proxy, matter was passed over in the morning session. In the afternoon session, time is prayed and same is refused. In fact from 19.03.2025, matter is adjourned to today at request of learned counsel for the revision petitioner. Taking note of the fact that revision petitioner has suffered an order of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, for the transaction that occurred in the year 2010, which was confirmed in Crl.A.No.36/2016 connected with Crl.A.No.72/2016. Taking note of these aspects of the matter, revision petition stands dismissed for non prosecution. SD/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV/CT:PA/List No.: 2 Sl No.: 37