Karnataka High Court
CRL.RP/1828/2025 of SRI KADIR AHAMAD A @ KATHEER AHAMAD Vs SMT. FAZILA K on 22 July 2026
CNR: KAHC010780082025 NC: 2026:KHC:37637 CRL.RP No. 1828 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1828 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SRI KADIR AHAMAD A . @ KATHEER AHAMAD S/O.
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1828 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI KADIR AHAMAD A.
@ KATHEER AHAMAD
S/O. ALLABAKSH
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.31/58
VASANTHA GARDEN,
SECOND STREET, AYANAVARAM
CHENNAI-600 023.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NATARAJ D., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SMT. FAZILA K.,
W/O. KADIR AHAMAD A,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
2.
SIDDIKA K.,
D/O KADIR AHAMAD A.,
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
3.
MR. WUWISE AHAMED K.,
S/O KADIR AHAMAD A.,
AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS
RESPONDENT NO.3 IS MINOR,
REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER
RESPONDENT NO.1.
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
ALL ARE
RESIDING AT NO.29
7TH CROSS, 6TH BLOCK
RAJAJINAGAR
BENGALURU-560 010.
…RESPONDENTS
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 OF CR.PC (FILED
U/S 438 R/W 442 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
OF JUDGEMENT IN CRL. MISC. NO.49 OF 2021 DATED
29/08/2024 PASSED BY HONBLE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST
CLASS
(TRAFFIC
COURT-VI)
COURT,
BENGALURU
AND
CONSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF PASSED IN CRL.
APPEAL NO.1849/2024 DATED 12/11/2024 BY THE HONBLE
LXII
ADDITIONAL
CITY
CIVIL
AND
SESSIONS
JUDGE
(CCH 62), CITY CIVIL COURT, BENGALURU AND STAY THE
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCES
ALLEGED IN THE COMPLAINT.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
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 matter is listed for consideration of I.A.No.1/2025 for condonation of delay of 289 days in filing the revision petition.
2. Heard learned counsel for the revision petitioner. This revision petition is filed against interim order passed by the First Appellate Court, wherein the order of the Trial Court was modified directing to pay Rs.3,000/- each per month to the wife and two children.
HC-KAR
3. With regard to the delay of 289 days in filing the revision petition, the reason assigned in the affidavit accompanying the application to condone the delay is that he is suffering from medical illness and taking regular medical treatment and could not able to contact his advocate on time because of his ill health, thereafter he contacted his Trial Court advocate and he suggested him to file the petition within 60 days. Due to his health condition and financial problem, he could not file the revision within limitation period. Immediately, after contacting his advocate, he advised to file revision petition.
4. Having taken note of the reasons assigned in the application to condone the delay, the petitioner has not specifically stated as to on what date, he came to know about the conditional order passed by the First Appellate Court and though the petitioner has stated in the affidavit that he was suffering from medical illness, nothing is placed on record with regard to his health condition and this revision petition is filed against the conditional order passed by the First Appellate Court and the delay of 289 days in filing the revision petition is
HC-KAR
not properly explained and no satisfactory reasons are assigned to condone the delay. Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2025 is dismissed. Consequently, the revision petition is also dismissed. The First Appellate Court is directed to dispose of the appeal within a period of three months, if interim order is complied within two weeks. The parties and their respective counsels are directed to assist the First Appellate Court in disposal of the case in a time bound period. The payment of interim-maintenance as directed by the First Appellate Court is condition precedent to consider the appeal on merits.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14