- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:898 CRL.RP No. 100186 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100186 OF 2018 (397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. BALLARI AGRO GOLD PROJECTS (PVT.) LTD., BY ITS DIRECTORS SRI. SIDDESH DASAMAPURA, S/O LATE D. LINGAPPA, AGE: 48 YEARS, R/O: GAVIKRUPA APARTMENTS, NEAR SHAKTHI NURSING HOME, TALUR ROAD, BALLARI, TQ AND DIST: BALLARI. 2. SRI. SIDDESH DASAMAPURA S/O LATE D. LINGAPPA, AGE: 48 YEARS, AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY OF M/S BALLARI AGRO GOLD PROJECTS (PVT.) LTD., R/O: GAVIKRUPA APARTMENTS NEAR SHAKTHI NURSING HOME, TALUR ROAD, BALLARI, TQ AND DIST: BALLARI. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B.C. JNANAYYA SWAMI, ADVOCATE) AND: G. RAVIKUMAR S/O G. SIDDANNA AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: SALES MANAGER IN SANDVIK MOBILES, R/O: SHIVA KRUPA NILAYA, A-BLOCK, PLOT NO.2, RAJIVNAGAR, HOSAPETE-583201, BALLARI DISTRICT. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. JAGADISH PATIL, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:898 CRL.RP No. 100186 of 2018 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 READ WITH 401 OF CR.PC., PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS, PERUSE THE SAME AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE PASSED BY THE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BALLARI SITTING AT HOSAPETE IN CRL.A.NO.5061/2015 DATED 07.08.2018 AND THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE PASSED BY THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HOSAPETE IN C.C.NO.562/2012 DATED 04.11.2015 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S.138 N.I. ACT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. The case called twice. 2. None represent on behalf of the petitioner. 3. The revision petitioner, who is the accused, has suffered an order of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 4. Even on the last date of hearing, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, the revision petition dismissed for non prosecution. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE RHR/-Ct-cmu LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 35