- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26880 CRL.RP No. 1008 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1008 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI. JAYAKUMAR. S @ VENKATESH KUMAR S S/O SRI SIDDAPPA R AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO.6/10, 4TH MAIN ROAD 8TH CROSS, SRINIVASANAGAR BSK 3RD STAGE BENGALURU-560 085 …PETITIONER (BY SRI MANJUNATH V, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. SUDHA V W/O SRI. SHIVASHANKAR AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS PRIYADARSHINI ROAD BENGALURU-560062 …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S. 397 OF 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT DATED 30.05.2025 PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.149/2023 BY THE LXIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU AND ETC. Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26880 CRL.RP No. 1008 of 2025 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 revision petition is filed on 02.07.2025. On 09.07.2025, the counsel for the petitioner was absent and this Court granted two weeks time to comply with the office objections. On 15.09.2025 also, none appears and this Court directed to list the matter after two weeks. On 06.01.2026, the counsel for the petitioner was absent before the Registrar and directed to post the matter before the Court. On 29.01.2026, the matter was called twice but no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, directed to list after two weeks and also directed that in meanwhile, office objections shall be complied. Inspite of that direction, office objections are not complied. Again on 27.02.2026, the matter was listed before the Registrar and the counsel for the petitioner was absent and three weeks time was granted for compliance of office objections and also directed that if office objections are not complied within three weeks, post the matter before the Court. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26880 CRL.RP No. 1008 of 2025 On 16.04.2025 also, the counsel for the petitioner was absent before the Registrar. 2. Today, the matter is listed before the Court for seventh time for compliance of office objections. This revision is filed against the concurrent finding of both the Courts. On perusal of the order sheet, it discloses that the counsel for the petitioner is not diligent in prosecuting the matter inspite of granting sufficient opportunity. Hence, I do not find any grounds to grant time again. Accordingly, petition is dismissed for non-compliance of office objections. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SN