- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26878 CRL.RP No. 151 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.151 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT. ERAMMA WIFE OF CHANNAVEERAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT NO.16, 14TH CROSS MAHALALKSHMI LAYOUT BENGALORE - 560 086 …PETITIONER (BY SRI ASHOK KUMAR B G, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S SHREE LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA FINANCE NO.16/1, 1ST CROSS JAYAMARUTHI NAGAR NANDINI LAYOUT BANGLAORE - 560096 REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRINIVAIAH SINCE DEAD, REP BY HIS LEGAL HEIR SMT. MALATHI W/O SRINIVASAIAH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT 16/1, 1ST CROSS JAYAMARUHI NAGAR NANDINI LAYOUT BANGALORE - 560 096 …RESPONDENT Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26878 CRL.RP No. 151 of 2025 THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 438 OF BNNS PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CONVICTION PASSED BY THE COURT BELOW WHICH IS CONFIRMED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE COURT, I.E., LVI ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALORE AND XXXVI ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENALURU IN C.C.NO.11925/2014 DATED 20.09.2022 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 revision petition is filed on 20.01.2025. On 28.01.2025, the counsel for the petitioner was absent and this Court granted two weeks time to comply with the office objections. On 22.09.2025, the matter was listed before the Registrar and at request of the counsel for the petitioner, a week’s time was granted for compliance of office objections. On 04.01.2025, the counsel for the petitioner was absent before the Registrar and again a week’s time was granted for compliance. On 06.01.2026, the counsel for the petitioner was absent before the Registrar and posted the matter before the Court on 29.01.2026 and at request of the counsel for the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26878 CRL.RP No. 151 of 2025 petitioner, this Court granted two weeks time and specific direction was given that in the meanwhile, office objections to be complied. Inspite of that direction, office objections are not complied. Again the matter was listed before the Registrar on 27.02.2026 and 16.04.2026, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Today, the matter is posted before the Court for eighth 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. 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