Karnataka High Court
CRL.RP/952/2026 of SRI GUDDAPPA KODIHALLI Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 22 July 2026
CNR: KAHC010391852026 NC: 2026:KHC:37830 CRL.RP No. 952 of 2026 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. 952 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. SRI GUDDAPPA KODIHALLI S/O HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED
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. 952 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI GUDDAPPA KODIHALLI
S/O HANUMANTHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT CHOWDESHWARI NAGARA,
KELAGINA PLOT, HIREKERUR TOWN,
HAVERI DISTRICT-581 110.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. GADILINGAPPA G M,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH SHIKARIPURA RURAL POLICE
STATION, SHIKARIPURA, SHIVAMOGGA
DISTRICT (REPRESENTED BY LEARNED
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001)
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. MOHAMMED AYUB ALI, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S. 397 R/W 401 CR.P.C BY THE
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE
COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED
12.07.2024 PASSED IN CRL.A NO.111/2022 BY THE LD
PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT SHIVAMOGGA WHERE
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
IN CONFIRMED THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER
OF SENTENCE DATED 10.08.2022 PASSED IN CRL. CASE
NO.1484/2015 BY THE LD II ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT
SHIKARIPURA FOR THE OFFEICE P/U/S 279, 304-A OF IPC AND
PRAYS
AN
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.
ORDER
OF ACQUITTAL ACQUITTING THE PETITIONER.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
ORAL ORDER
Heard learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner on I.A.No.3/2026 for condonation of delay of 609 days in filing the revision petition.
2. This revision petition is filed with a delay of 609 days. The reasons stated in the application is that the counsel on record in the appeal did not inform in time to the revision petitioner about the dismissal of the appeal and confirmation of the judgment passed by the learned trial Judge. It is further stated in the memorandum of facts that when the respondent police came to execute the conviction warrant, at that time, the revision petitioner came to know that the Appellate Court had dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment passed by
HC-KAR
the Trial Court. Thereafter, the revision petitioner immediately took steps to obtain the advice and filed the present petition.
3. Having considered the reasons assigned in the application to condone the delay, no proper reasons are assigned and even an allegation is made against the advocate that the advocate has not informed him about the dismissal of appeal and nothing is stated about the revision petitioner what effort he made to know the result of the appeal. In criminal case No.1484/2015, the accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304A of IPC with the sentence of 1 year with a fine of Rs.5,500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment of three months on 10.08.2022. An appeal was filed and appeal was disposed of on 12.07.2024. Even after disposal of the appeal and confirmation of the conviction and sentence, till 2026 not filed any revision petition and the reason assigned is also bald and unsatisfactory and no sufficient reasons are made out to condone the delay. Hence, I.A.No.3/2026 is dismissed and consequently revision petition is also dismissed.
HC-KAR
4. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the accident was taken place in the year 2015 and almost a decade has been elapsed and hence, in lieu of the sentence of one year, compensation may be awarded to the family of the deceased.
5. In view of the said submission and also taking into note that the accident was taken place in the year 2015 and also it was an accident and not an intentional act and apart from that, the petitioner is in jail undergoing the sentence and already served two months, this Court finds that justice would be met if compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- is awarded to the family of the deceased instead of serving the remaining sentence.
6. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The criminal revision petition is allowed in part.
(ii) The revision petitioner is directed to pay an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation in lieu of sentence and ten days time is granted to
HC-KAR
deposit the amount before the Trial Court. Out of the said amount, an amount of Rs.2,80,000/- is payable to the wife of the deceased, on proper identification. The remaining amount of Rs.20,000/- shall vest with the State.
(iii) If the amount is deposited forthwith, the Trial Court is directed to intimate the same to the jail authorities to release the revision petitioner.
(iv) If the revision petitioner fails to deposit the amount within ten days, the revision petitioner has to suffer the sentence as ordered by the Trial Court for completion of sentence.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
SSD/MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18