- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29608 CRL.RP No. 1630 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1630 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. M/S TINY WORLD TECHNOLOGIES A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.589, 2ND FLOOR, 2ND MAIN, 7TH CROSS, ARAVIND NAGAR, MYSORE-570 023, TALUK:MYSORE DISTRICT:MYSORE. ALSO AT NO.45, SRINIVAS, 3RD FLOOR, KUMARA PARK EAST, BENGALURU-560001. 2. SMT. MAHALAKSHMI WIFE OF SRI.CHIKKALINGE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO. 295, 18TH MAIN, B BLOCK, VIJAYANAGARA,3RD STAGE, MYSORE-570 017, TALUK:MYSORE DISTRICT:MYSORE. 3. MR. AKSHAY. C. S. SON OF SRI. SUDARSHAN BABU. C. S., AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDIG AT NO. 22, SKANDA NILAYA, KANAKAMARA ROAD, K.V. EXTENSION, Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29608 CRL.RP No. 1630 of 2025 KRISHNARAJAPURAM, BANGALORE-560 036. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. REENA R,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S ORANGE COMPUTERS SERVICES PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM HAVING OFFICE AT NO. 1ST FLOOR, 3RD MAIN ROAD,MARUTHI EXTENSION, NEAR SRIRAMPURA METRO STATION, BENGALURU-560 021, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETRIX, SMT. D. LATHA, DAUGHTER OF DURAI, WIFE OF ARUN KUMAR. E …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MELANIE SEBASTIAN,ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 CR.P.C (U/S 438 R/W 442 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THIS PETITION BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND ORDER OF THE VI ACMM, BANGALORE CITY, SCCH-6 DTD 19.06.2023 IN CC.NO.4656/2020 AND ALSO THE JUDGEMENT AND ORDER OF THE LVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE IN CRL.A.NO.948/2023 AND CONSEQUENTLY ACQUIT THE PETITIONER FROM THE SAID OFFENCES. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29608 CRL.RP No. 1630 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel for revision petitioners on IA No.1/2026 seeking for extension of time. 2. This Court vide order dated 25.02.2026 has directed the revision petitioners to deposit 40% of the fine amount inclusive of the amount already deposited within a period of six weeks from the date of the order and no application is filed within the expiry of period of six weeks. Instead of that, the revision petitioners has filed the present application on 09.04.2026 i.e., almost after four months and not tendered any demand draft. 3. Today also, the learned counsel for the revision petitioners again seeks time to deposit the fine amount and there is no meaning in granting time once again when the time is stipulated by this Court to deposit the amount within a period of six weeks. Apart from that, learned counsel appearing for respondent would submit that he has not deposited the amount as directed by the appellate - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29608 CRL.RP No. 1630 of 2025 Court in Crl.A.No.948/2023. Under the said circumstances, the question of granting time does not arise and also when the petitioner fails to obey the order of this Court, question of consideration of this revision petition also does not arise since this revision petition is against the concurrent finding of the trial Court in C.C.No.4656/2020, wherein the revision petitioner has directed to pay fine amount of Rs.4,12,61,034/-. The same is confirmed by the appellate Court in Crl.A.No.948/2023. Therefore, the question of consideration of granting time to deposit the fine amount as per the conditional order dated 25.02.2026 and so also consideration of this revision petition do not arise. Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2026 is rejected and consequently, the revision petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SSD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13