- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:151-DB CRL.A No. 1297 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1297 OF 2025 (A) BETWEEN: 1. SRI SHIVAMURTYAPPA S/O. KAVADI MALKAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDENT OF NERALAGI VILLAGE SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-582 102. 2. BHARATHI W/O. SHIVAMURTHYAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS RESIDENT OF NERALAGI VILLAGE SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-582 102. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI RAMESH YANKOB, ADVOCATE FOR COMP-1; SMT. ARCHANA K.M., AMICUS CURIAE FOR COMP-2 [AUTHORIZED BY HCLSC]) AND: 1. SRI NINGAPPA S/O. LATE KAVADI MALKAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS RESIDING AT NERALIGI VILLAGE UDUGANI HOBLI, SHIKARIPURA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-582 102. 2. SRI NAGARAJA NAGA S/O. NINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDING AT NERALIGI VILLAGE UDUGANI HOBLI, SHIKARIPURA TALUK Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:151-DB CRL.A No. 1297 of 2025 SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-582 102. 3. PRADEEPA KOTI S/O. VIJAYENDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDING AT NERALIGI VILLAGE UDUGANI HOBLI, SHIKARIPURA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-582 102. 4. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH SHIKARIPURA POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 18-7-2025) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAVI H.S., ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, SPP-II FOR R-4) * * * THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) OF THE CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 30-1-2023 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SHIKARIPURA AND TO PASS AN ORDER REVERSING THE ORDER OF ACQUITTAL INTO AN ORDER OF CONVICTION, CONVICTING THE RESPONDENTS FOR HAVING COMMITTED AN OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 504, 324, 325, 326, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC TO THE MAXIMUM SENTENCE. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:151-DB CRL.A No. 1297 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH) Heard Smt. Archana K.M. learned Amicus Curiae appearing for appellant No.2/complainant No.2, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3/accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 and learned SPP-II appearing for respondent No.4-State. There is no representation on behalf of appellant No.1/complainant No.1 when the matter was called in the morning session or during post-lunch session. There is a delay of 808 days in filing the present appeal and the reasons assigned by the appellants/complainant Nos.1 and 2 in the accompanying affidavit filed in support of the application is that against the judgment of the trial Court acquitting respondent Nos.1 to 3, criminal revision petition in Crl.R.P.No.15/2023 was preferred before the I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga, which came to be dismissed as not maintainable and the remedy was to file a criminal appeal and that appellant No.2/complainant No.2 was suffering from serious injuries sustained by her in the assault by respondent Nos.1 to 3 and hence, the appeal could not be filed - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:151-DB CRL.A No. 1297 of 2025 in time. However, it is to be noted that no details are available as to whether the injury sustained by appellant No.2/complainant No.2 was subsequent to the dismissal of revision petition or earlier to the filing of criminal revision petition and the inordinate delay of 808 days in filing the appeal has not been explained properly. Further, on perusal of the material available on record, it transpires that initially a private complaint was filed against the accused and the police investigated the matter and filed the 'B' report and against the said 'B' report, the complainants filed statement of objections. The trial Court considering the material available on record, after trial, came to the conclusion that there is no material available to convict the accused and hence acquitted the accused persons. Being aggrieved by the same, the complainants preferred a revision petition and the appellate court dismissed the revision petition by order dated 05.07.2024, on the ground that revision petition is not maintainable and an appeal lies against acquittal. It also transpires that even after dismissal of the revision petition on 05.07.2024, there is delay in filing the present appeal, which is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:151-DB CRL.A No. 1297 of 2025 filed on 17.06.2025, i.e., almost lapse of one year. When such being the case, we do not find any ground to condone the inordinate delay of 808 days in filing the appeal and hence I.A.1/2025 stands rejected, consequently the appeal is also liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE MN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8