Karnataka High Court
CRL.RP/981/2026 of PNG GOLD COMPANY Vs K KRISHNAMURTHY on 7 August 2026
CNR: KAHC010403322026 NC: 2026:KHC:41732 CRL.RP No. 981 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 981 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. PNG GOLD COMPANY, NO.45, 2ND FLOOR, KATRIGUPPE
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 981 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
1.
PNG GOLD COMPANY,
NO.45, 2ND FLOOR,
KATRIGUPPE MAIN ROAD,
80 FEET ROAD,
NEXT TO RELIANCE SUPER MARKET,
BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU-560085.
REP. BY MANAGING PARTNER.
2.
PUNEET N.,
S/O NARSIMHA SWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
PARTNER, PNG GOLD COMPANY,
NO.45, 2ND FLOOR,
KATRIGUPPE MAIN ROAD,
80 FEET ROAD,
NEXT TO RELIANCE SUPER MARKET,
BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU-560085.
3.
MOHAN N.,
S/O NARSIMHA SWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
PARTNER, PNG GOLD COMPANY,
NO.45, 2ND FLOOR,
KATRIGUPPE MAIN ROAD,
80 FEET ROAD,
NEXT TO RELIANCE SUPER MARKET,
BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU-560085.
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
THE PETITIONER CAN ALSO BE SERVED
2ND FLOOR, NO 1130, 11TH CROSS,
7TH MAIN ROAD, SRINAGARA,
BENGALURU-560050.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SYED AKBAR PASHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
K. KRISHNAMURTHY,
S/O KANNAPPAACHARI,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
PROPRIETOR,
M/S. KRISHNA GEMS AND JEWELLERY WORK,
NO.30, BASAVANNA TEMPLE STREET,
ANCHEPET, BENGALURU-560053.
…RESPONDENT
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNFRT SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF
CR.PC (FILED U/S 438 R/W 442 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED BY
THE LEARNED LVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE
AT BENGALURU IN CRL.A.NO.1875/2024 DATED 21.04.2026
AND THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE PASSED
BY THE LEARNED XXII ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.27886/2023 DATED 14.10.2024 WHICH
COURT HAD CONVICTED THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I ACT, FURTHER
PLEASE TO REMAND THE CASE TO THE LEARNED TRIAL COURT
TO CONDUCT DE-NOVA TRIAL IN THE ABOVE CASE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
This Court heard the matter in length in the previous occasion on 07.07.2026 and suspended the sentence subject to the petitioners depositing 50% of the fine amount, including the amount already deposited before the Trial Court within four weeks and also directed to execute a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety within two weeks. It was also made clear that if the petitioners fail to deposit the fine amount within four weeks, the conditional order granted by the Court would automatically stand vacated. This Court having heard the matter in detail, came to the conclusion that there is no merit in the revision petition. Hence, the learned counsel for the revision petitioners made the submission that the petitioners are willing to settle the matter and sought time and hence, four weeks time was granted to settle the matter.
2. Today, the learned counsel for the revision petitioners would submit that there is no settlement.
3. Having perused the reasoning of the Trial Court in paragraph No.11, there is no rebuttal evidence and also not led
HC-KAR
any defence evidence. The Trial Court taken note of Ex.P.2 endorsement and also that the notice was issued and the same was served, but no reply was given. In the absence of rebuttal evidence, convicted and sentenced the accused. The Appellate Court re-appreciated the material available on record and confirmed the judgment of the Trial Court. When the order of both the Courts not suffers from its legality and correctness and no miscarriage of justice, the question of entertaining the revision petition does not arise. Hence, the criminal revision petition is dismissed.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18