Karnataka High Court
CRL.RP/1922/2025 of SMT HEMAVATHI Vs S M GANGADHAR on 6 October 2026
2026:KHC:55682
CNR: KAHC010826132025 NC: 2026:KHC:55682 CRL.RP No. 1922 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1922 OF 2025 (397(Cr.PC) / 438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. SMT HEMAVATHI W/O
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1922 OF 2025
(397(Cr.PC) / 438(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1.
SMT HEMAVATHI
W/O K. CHANDRASHEKHAR,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 133, 2ND MAIN,
4TH CROSS, NEAR BBMP OFFICE,
RHB COLONY, MAHADEVAPURA,
BENGALURU - 560 048.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. CHANDAN B K.,ADVOCATE-ABSENT)
AND:
1.
S M GANGADHAR
S/O LATE MUDDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.23, 4TH CROSS,
2ND MAIN, BANASHANKARI 2ND STAGE,
ITTAMADU, BENGALURU - 560 086
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.N.SURESH BABU, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 CR.PC (FILED
U/S 438 R/W 442 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE
PETITIONER PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER / JUDGMENT
K B GEETHA
HC-KAR
Page 1 of 2
DATED 07.11.2025 PASSED BY THE LV ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS
JUDGE,
BENGALURU
IN
CRL.A.NO.1048/2025,
CONFIRMING
THE
JUDGMENT
AND SENTENCE DATED 13.06.2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE XII ADDL.JUDGE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND A.C.M.M BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.28401/2024 BY ALLOWING THE ABOVE RP.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.
ORAL ORDER
The learned counsel for the revision petitioner is absent in both the sessions. On the previous occasion, his proxy counsel prayed for time, and finally, by imposing costs, the matter was adjourned.
2. The order sheet speaks that since, 18.06.2026, on 6 occasions, accused prays time to settle the dispute; to pay the balance amount; however, he did not do so; since last two hearing dates, he was directed to submit arguments on merits, if he fails to pay the balance amount. However, the revision petitioner has neither paid
K B GEETHA
HC-KAR
the balance amount as agreed before the Court nor submitted his arguments. This shows that the revision petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the petition.
Hence, the petition is dismissed for non- prosecution.
(GEETHA K.B.) JUDGE
SPV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12
Digitally Signed By: K B GEETHA
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…