- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28033 CRL.RP No. 641 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.641 OF 2026 BETWEEN: MR B JAYAKUMAR S/O BAKTHAVATSALA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT SUDHA NILAYA NO.11, 13TH CROSS 6TH MAIN ROAD BENCHAKALLU PALYA SRIGANDHADAKAVAL D GROUP LAYOUT BENGALURU-560 091 …PETITIONER (BY SRI HANUMESH H N, ADVOCATE) AND: SANTHOSH S/O SHIVARAM D M AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT NO.17, PAPAIAH STREET DODDA MAVALLI BENGALURU-560 004 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI PRAVEEN C P, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28033 CRL.RP No. 641 of 2026 THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED LXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU CITY CCH-62 IN CRL.A.NO.576/2024 DATED 16.02.2026 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER The counsel for the revision petitioner files I.A.No.2/2026 for extension of time. 2. On perusal of the order sheet, it discloses that this revision petition is listed for admission. This court directed the petitioner counsel to submit that whether 20% of the fine amount is deposited before the appellate court or not. The counsel makes the submission that the same is not complied with. This court also vide order dated 22.04.2026 suspended the sentence for the petitioner subject to deposit of 50% of the fine amount inclusive of the fine amount already deposited - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28033 CRL.RP No. 641 of 2026 within a period of 4 weeks before the trial court. But the order of this court also not complied with. 3. Now, the counsel for the petitioner filed an application seeking extension of time to comply the said order. Except seeking for extension of time, how much time to be extended is not mentioned. However, in the affidavit, in paragraph 4, it is stated that four weeks time may be granted. But counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that even not made any deposit before the first appellate court as well as before this court within a time. 4. Having considered the conduct of the revision petitioner and in the application, though time is not stated in the application but in the affidavit, it is stated as four weeks, but not placed any material before the court for having an intention to comply with the order. Except the bald prayer for seeking four weeks time to deposit the amount, even not made any efforts to offer on demand before this court. When such conduct is noticed by this court and when the amount was not deposited before the appellate court as submitted by the counsel for the petitioner and no bona fides in the application - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28033 CRL.RP No. 641 of 2026 for seeking of extension of time, it is not a fit case to extend the time. Hence, I.A.No.2/2026 is rejected. Consequently, the revision petition is also dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SN