Karnataka High Court
CRL.RP/265/2025 of S. H. UMESH Vs M. SUBRAMANI on 29 July 2026
CNR: KAHC010106272025 NC: 2026:KHC:39456 CRL.RP No. 265 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.265 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. S.H. UMESH S/O. LATE S.R.HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.265 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
1.
S.H. UMESH
S/O. LATE S.R.HANUMANTHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT LOKESH NILAYA
1ST FLOOR, ABOVE CAUVERY TEXTILES
MARIYAMMA TEMPLE MAIN ROAD
SRIRAMAPURA, JAKKUR POST
BENGALURU-560 064.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SANTHOSH KUMAR M.B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
M. SUBRAMANI
S/O. LATE MUNISHAMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT NO.79/2, NEAR BUS STOP,
SRIRAMAPURA, JAKKUR POST,
BENGALURU-560 064.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. KUMAR 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
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.
JUDGMENT
AND
ORDER
OF CONVICTION DATED 16.06.2022 IN C.C.NO.3710/2020 PASSED BY THE VI ADDL.
Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
JUDGE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND ACMM, BENGALURU AND JUDGMENT DATED 04.12.2024 IN CRL.A.NO.843/2022 PASSED BY THE LXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGLAURU CITY AND ACQUIT THE PETITIONER BY ALLOWING THE RP.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
ORAL ORDER
This Court vide order dated 20.02.2025 directed the petitioner to deposit 50% of the amount, inclusive of the amount already deposited. Inspite of it, the same is not complied. This matter is listed for admission and having perused the material on record, no reply was given by the accused when notice was issued.
2. The Trial Court also in paragraph Nos.18 and 19 taken note of material on record and given reasons in paragraph No.19 that when the defendant taken the defence that he has received Rs.95,000/- only from the complainant as hand loan, but nothing is produced to substantiate the same. The accused has received the statutory notice and no reply was given and he had the knowledge of contents of statutory notice is not in dispute. The Trial Court also in paragraph No.20 taken
HC-KAR
note that for having repaid the loan amount to complainant, no positive evidence is placed on record and accused has not taken any steps to collect the Cheques in question-Exs.P1 and P2 from the complainant nor he has given intimation to banker to stop the payment in caution. Having considered the material on record, the Trial Court convicted and sentence the accused.
3. The First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.843/2022 also confirmed the judgment of the Trial Court considering the material on record, particularly the evidence of P.W.1 and D.W.1 and not produced any document for having repaid the amount and hence, confirmed the judgment of the Trial Court. Therefore, no ground is made out to entertain the revision petition. Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25