Karnataka High Court
CRL.RP/1728/2025 of ASGAR ALI Vs MANJUNATHA GOWDA K V on 17 July 2026
CNR: KAHC010748722025 NC: 2026:KHC:36653 CRL.RP No. 1728 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1728 OF 2025 BETWEEN: ASGAR ALI S/O LATE KHADEER AHMED AGED ABOUT 49
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1728 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
ASGAR ALI
S/O LATE KHADEER AHMED
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
R/AT CHAMPAKADAMA CHOLTRY
MASJID ROAD, MALUR TOWN
KOLAR DISTRICT 563 130
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RASHEED KHAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
MANJUNATHA GOWDA K V
S/O VENKATARAYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT KAJIKALLAHALLI VILLAGE
NARASAPURA HOBLI & POST
KOLAR TALUK & DISTRICT-563133
…RESPONDENT
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C
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.
JUDGEMENT
IN CRL.A.NO.81/2022 DATED 01.10.2024 ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE PRL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT KOLAR AND ETC.
Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner on I.A.No.1/2025 for condonation of delay of 319 days in filing this revision petition.
2. This revision petition is filed against the concurrent finding wherein the Trial Court vide judgment dated 20.10.2022 in C.C.No.83/2016 convicted and sentenced the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act and directed to pay an amount of Rs.7,55,000/- and in default, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months vide order. The said judgment of conviction was confirmed by the Appellate Court vide its judgment dated 01.10.2024 in Crl.A.No.81/2022.
3. In support of the delay, an application is filed and sworn to an affidavit stating that as soon as dismissal of the appeal, petitioner has applied for certified copy of the judgment
HC-KAR
and thereafter he was not feeling well and suffering from inflammation and infection and he was not able to move out from the house on the advice of the doctor and certified copy was obtained on 22.08.2025 and also on shortage of the financial assistance, the petitioner could not file this revision petition within time. Hence, there is delay of 319 days in filing the petition.
4. On perusal of the records, it discloses that the Appellate Court passed the judgment on 01.10.2024 and certified copy was obtained on 22.08.2025 i.e., almost a year and this revision petition is filed on 14.11.2025 even after obtaining the certified copy of the judgment on 22.08.2025. But delay is not properly explained except stating that he was not feeling well and nothing is placed on record to that effect showing that where he took the treatment. The other reason assigned is that he was having shortage of the financial assistance and could not file the revision petition in time.
5. Having taken note of the reasons assigned in the application for condonation of delay, the same is not satisfactory. The petitioner has not stated in the affidavit that
HC-KAR
he was not aware of the judgment passed by the Appellate Court in the month of October 2024. The copy of the judgment was also obtained after almost a year and no reasons are assigned stating that why there was a delay of almost a year in obtaining the certified copy. Hence, the reasons assigned for condonation of delay is not satisfactory since each day delay has to be explained properly. Hence, no ground is made out to condone the delay of 319 days in filing the petition. Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2025 is dismissed. Consequently, the petition is also dismissed.
6. In view of dismissal of the petition, I.A. if any, does not survive for consideration and the same stands disposed of.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
SN