Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 34344 (KAR)

SRI BHASKAR S U v. SMT LAKSHMI Y N

CRL.RP/803/2026 · 2026-07-31

H P Sandesh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010340672026 NC: 2026:KHC:40075 CRL.RP No. 803 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 803 OF 2026 (397(CR.PC) / 438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI BHASKAR S U S/O MR. S.G. UMASHANKAR AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO.24/25, 1ST MAIN ROAD NEAR OLD PAPER MART, SRINIDHI LAYOUT KONANAKUNTE, BENGALURU - 560062. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. APOORVA N, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT LAKSHMI Y N W/O MR. R. SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT NO.16, 6TH CROSS KUVEMPU NAGAR, DODDAKALASANDRA KANAKAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU-560062. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. NATARAJA K., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 438 R/W 442 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION PASSED BY THE TRIAL COURT IN C.C.NO.11294/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II A.C.J.M BENGALURU RURAL DIST. BENGALURU AND CONFIRMED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE COURT IN CRL.A.NO.106/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT AND ETC. Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010340672026 NC: 2026:KHC:40075 CRL.RP No. 803 of 2026 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER 1. This Court vide order dated 19.05.2026 has suspended the sentence subject to petitioner depositing further 30% of the fine amount before the Trial Court within four weeks. Inspite of this direction, the same is not complied with. On perusal of the judgment of the Trial Court, in paragraphs 17 and 19, it has taken note of the defence which was taken by the revision petitioner that there was a transaction between him and DW2. According to the accused, he had transaction with DW2, but DW2 comes before the Court and denies the same. The Trial Court having taken note of the defence and also the cross examination in paragraphs 17 and 19 and so also in 23 has come to the conclusion that the defence was not substantiated. The same is also taken note by the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.106/2025. There is no any probable evidence as such in the case. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010340672026 NC: 2026:KHC:40075 CRL.RP No. 803 of 2026 2. No ground is made out to entertain the revision petition and hence, the revision petition is dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE DM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 31