Karnataka High Court
CRL.RP/1404/2016 of SRI M P EREGOWDA Vs SRI MUDIYAPPA on 2 July 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:33005 CRL.RP No. 1404 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1404 OF 2016 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. M.P.EREGOWDA, S/O LATE PUTTEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1404 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI. M.P.EREGOWDA,
S/O LATE PUTTEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT NO.253, CDA LAYOUT,
BYPASS ROAD,
KALYANANAGARA,
JYOTHINAGAR POST,
CHIKKAMAGALURU-577102.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. JAGADEESH D.C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
1(a)
SRI. MUDIYAPPA,
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS.
SRI. M. MALLAPPA,
S/O LATER MUDIYAPPA,
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.
1(b)
SMT. RUDRAMMA,
W/O LATE MUDIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS.
1(c)
SMT. GEETHA G.M.,
W/O LATE MALLAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
BOTH ARE R/AT SHASANA SADANA,
OPP: UPPALLI RAMESHWARA TEMPLE,
UPPALLI NEW EXTENSION,
INDAVARA ROAD,
CHIKKAMAGALURU-577101.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. N.R.RAVIKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR
LRS OF DECEASED RESPONDENT)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397(1) R/W
401(1) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
7.10.2016 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU IN CRL.A.NO.67/2013 IN CONFIRMING THE
JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION, SENTENCE AND FINE DATED
19.01.2013 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND
J.M.F.C.,
CHIKKAMAGALURU
IN
C.C.NO.3465/2006
AND
CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE
COMPLAINANT.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING 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
The petitioner is present before the Court. The respondents are not present before the Court. The respondent Nos.1(b) and 1(c) are the legal representatives of the original complainant and both of them have filed the affidavit before the Court and the same is identified by the learned counsel on record for the respondents. The learned counsel for the respondents also not disputes the same. Hence, the same is accepted.
HC-KAR
2. Both the parties have filed the joint memo. It is stated that the petitioner has already deposited an amount of Rs.81,250/- and 52,500/- before the Trial Court. The said amount deposited before the Trial Court shall be treated as full and final settlement. Hence, the joint memo is accepted. The amount in deposit to the tune of Rs.1,33,750/- is ordered to be released in favour of respondent No.1(b), on proper identification in terms of the affidavit.
3. Accordingly, the revision petition is disposed of in terms of the joint memo.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 78