Friday, 01, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

K Usman vs I H Moiddin
2021 Latest Caselaw 302 Kant

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 302 Kant
Judgement Date : 6 January, 2021

Karnataka High Court
K Usman vs I H Moiddin on 6 January, 2021
Author: Dr.H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

    DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

                        BEFORE

THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

  CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.559 OF 2013

BETWEEN:

K. Usman
S/o Bhava Beary
Aged about 45 years
Kundapura Transport,
B.R.S. Nilaya,
South Extension,
2nd Cross, 1st Division,
Vidyanagara,
Chikkanayakanahalli Post
Tumkur District - 572214.
                                     :PETITIONER

(By Sri Abdul Wajid S., Advocate)

AND:

I.H. Moiddin
S/o of Hamad Beary
Aged about 51 years
Agriculturist,
Guddethota Village
Koppa Taluk,
Udupi - 576101.
                                    :RESPONDENT
(By Srinath G.B., Advocate)
                                              Crl.R.P.No.559/2013
                               2


        This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section
397 read with S.401 of Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the
Judgment and sentence passed by the Fast Track Court,
Chikmagalur dated 22.03.2013 in Crl.A. No.195/2012,
confirming the Judgment and sentence passed by the Civil
Judge    and   JMFC,   Koppa    dated   16.10.2012    in   C.C.
No.346/2007 and such other order as the Court deems fit
in the circumstances of the case.


        This Criminal Revision Petition coming on for Orders

through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing this day, the

Court made the following:


                           ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioner is neither present

physically nor through video conference.

A perusal of the order sheets would go to show that

in this revision petition of the year 2013, in spite of

granting sufficient opportunities, the petitioner has not

taken steps to bring the legal representatives of deceased

respondent on record.

Crl.R.P.No.559/2013

On 17.01.2020 itself this Court had granted two

weeks' time to the petitioner as a final opportunity. Even

thereafter also, on two more occasions, the matter was

listed. Still the petitioner has not taken steps to bring the

legal representatives of deceased respondent on record.

As such, petition stands abated since the sole

respondent has died and his legal representatives have not

been brought on record.

Sd/-

JUDGE

sac*

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter