Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 21975 (KAR)

SRI SAMRUDDI SUPARI TRADERS v. M/S DHANYASHREE TRADERS

CRL.RP/340/2024 · 2026-06-16

H P Sandesh

Public Interest Litigationbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29245 CRL.RP No. 340 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 340 OF 2024 BETWEEN: SRI SAMRUDDI SUPARI TRADERS, NAVAJYOTHI BUILDING, JOSEPH NAGAR, SAGAR CITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SMT. REETHA P CHOWDHARY, W/O SRI.PUDALIKA K CHOWDHARY, IST MAIN, LEFT SIDE KEB PILLAR, NO.39, 3RD CROSS, SHREEDHAR NAGAR, SAGAR TOWN - 577 401. …PETITIONER (BY SMT.B.R.HARINI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. R B SADASIVAPPA., ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. DHANYASHREE TRADERS, NEERKODU EXTENSION, MANKALALE ROAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI. SUNIL KUMAR, S/O SRI. PUNDALIKA KHANDKE, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT SAGAR HOTEL CIRCLE, TILAK ROAD, Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29245 CRL.RP No. 340 of 2024 SAGAR CITY, SHIMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 401. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S.V.PRAKASH., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S. 397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.12.2023 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE 5TH ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SHIMOGGA SITTING AT SAGAR IN CRL.A.NO.10339/2023 CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE DATED 24.06.2023 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SAGAR IN C.C.NO.59/2022 AND BE PLEASED TO ACQUIT THE ACCUSED / PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I. ACT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not complied the conditional order of suspension of sentence and also not executed the bond before the trial Court. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29245 CRL.RP No. 340 of 2024 2. Learned counsel for the respondent is also present and submits that no such compliance is made. 3. This revision petition is of the year 2024, is not yet admitted and hence, question of consideration of revision petition on merits does not arise. 4. In view of non-compliance of the conditional order of suspension of sentence, so also, considering the submission of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the revision petitioner is also not responding to him, the Revision Petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE PSJ List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4