- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30194 CRL.RP No. 1444 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1444 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. LAKSHMAIAH, S/O LATE SRI. RAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT CHEEYANDAHALLI VILLAGE, SHAPUR POST, KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563103. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI R., ADVOCATE -ABSENT) AND: 1. SMT. SHYLA K., W/O SRI. VENKATACHALAPATHI M., AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT NO.1, 2ND CROSS, 10TH MAIN, NANDANAM COLONY, HORAMAVU MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560043. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MUNIRAJU S., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 438 R/W 442 BNNS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 03.11.2023 PASSED IN C.C.NO.58062/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXIII ACMM AT MAYO HALL, WHERE THE HONBLE TRIAL COURT PASSED AN ORDER BY CONVICTING PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 255(2) Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30194 CRL.RP No. 1444 of 2024 OF CR. PC FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT, 1881, AND SENTENCED PETITIONER TO PAY FINE OF RS.2,75,000/- (RUPEES TWO LAKHS SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND ONLY), IN DEFAULT OF FINE AMOUNT, PETITIONER SHALL UNDERGO SIMPLE IMPRISONMENT FOR SIX MONTHS AND ALSO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED DISMISSAL ORDER DATED 5TH SEPTEMBER 2024 THAT WAS PASSED IN THE SAID CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.25320/2023 WHICH WAS FILED UNDER SECTION 374 OF CR PC BEFORE THE HONBLE LXXIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT MAYOHALL, BENGALURU (CCH-75). THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER The learned counsel for the revision petitioner is absent. 2. This Court passed the conditional order suspending the sentence on 20.01.2025 and the records disclose that the said order is not complied with. The matter was also referred to the mediation and the same was not settled. The petitioner is not pursuing the matter before the Court except obtaining the conditional order and this revision petition is filed against the concurrent finding and not led any defence evidence before the Trial Court. The Trial Court taken note of Ex.P.1 cheque and legal notice Ex.P.3. Except the bare denial of the case of the complainant, nothing is placed on record and also not led - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30194 CRL.RP No. 1444 of 2024 any rebuttal evidence. Though it is contented that the wife of the accused has repaid the principal amount along with interest till certain period, the accused even did not put a single suggestion in that respect as to in what manner it was repaid while cross-examining P.W.1. The Appellate Court also considered the material on record and re-assessed the same and there is no rebuttal evidence and hence, I do not find any ground to admit the revision petition and scope of revision is very limited. Apart from that, the petitioner is not pursuing the matter diligently and even not complied with the conditional order and hence, the revision petition is dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE MD List No.: 2 Sl No.: 17