- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25440 CRL.RP No. 474 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.474 OF 2025 BETWEEN: NAGARAJ C S/O LATE CHINNAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT NO.11/4, 2ND FLOOR 10TH MAIN ROAD, K.P.AGRAHARA MAGADI ROAD BENGALURU – 560023 …PETITIONER (BY SRI GOPAL SINGH, ADVOCATE) AND: KANAKARAJU R S/O RAMALINGAM AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT NO.3, 5TH CROSS 10TH MAIN ROAD, K.P.AGRAHARA MAGADI ROAD BENGALURU – 560023 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 CR.PC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DATED 25.11.2023, AS PER DOCUMENT NO.1 IN Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25440 CRL.RP No. 474 of 2025 C.C.NO.6130/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE XXIII ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER This Court vide order dated 10.06.2025 suspended the sentence against the petitioner subject to depositing of 50% of the fine amount including the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of 4 weeks. But the revision petitioner has not filed any application within time for extension of time to comply the said order and even after the expiry of the time also, not filed any application and only after the issuance of NBW by the Trial Court, the present application is filed that is after one year assigning the reason that due to financial constraints, the petitioner could not comply with the order dated 10.06.2025. 2. Having taken note of the reason assigned in the application and when the conditional order was passed by this Court almost one year ago, the petitioner has not complied the same and not even filed any application for extension of time within time or after expiry of the stipulated time and only after - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:25440 CRL.RP No. 474 of 2025 issuance of NBW against the petitioner by the Trial Court, the present application is filed and the reason assigned in the application is not satisfactory to the Court and hence, the same is not accepted. Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2026 is dismissed. 3. Having perused the order passed by the Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court, it discloses that there is a concurrent finding and scope of revision before this Court is also limited. When the revision petitioner is not complying the order of this Court, the question of considering the revision also does not arise. Consequently, the revision petition is also dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SN