- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33169 CRL.RP No. 239 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.239 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. T S BASAVARAJU S/O LATE SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT BEHIND SHISHUVIHARA, THOTADASALU, AGRAHARA, TUMAKURU TOWN, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572107. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. H G SAVITHA W/O NARENDRABABU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT VEERABHADRASWAMY KRUPA, 3RD LINK ROAD, 9TH CROSS, S.I.T. EXTENSION, TUMAKURU. …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C (U/S 438 R/W 442 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT PASSED BY VII ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, AT TUMAKURU IN CRL.A.NO.61/2025 DTD 29.10.2025 AND THE JUDGEMENT IN CC.NO.4099/2017 PASSED BY THE V ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND VI JMFC, AT TUMAKURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33169 CRL.RP No. 239 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER Heard on I.A.No.3/2026 wherein prayer is sought for extension of time. 2. This Court vide order dated 25.02.2026 directed the petitioner to deposit 40% of the fine amount inclusive of the amount, if any, already deposited within a period of six weeks. This application is filed on 30.04.2026 for an extension of time once again seeking six weeks' time, but has not produced any receipt or any document to show the bonafides that he intends to deposit the amount. 3. Though order was passed in the month of February, the petitioner has sought extension of time in the month of July. No such bonafides is shown and even the application seeking extension of time was filed on 30.04.2026. 4. Till today, the petitioner has not made any effort to deposit the amount. The period of six weeks - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33169 CRL.RP No. 239 of 2026 sought in the application has also expired by efflux of time. Consequently, the application seeking extension of time has become infructuous. The petitioner has neither deposited the amount nor produced any Demand Draft before this Court. In the absence of any bona fide effort on the part of the petitioner to comply with the earlier order, the application for extension of time is liable to be rejected. 5. Accordingly, the application seeking extension of time is rejected. Consequently, the revision petition also stands dismissed as the same is not admitted and also the conditional order was not complied with sufficient time was given and extended. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE DS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18