Bettashetty vs The State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 623 Kant

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

    DATED THIS THE 13 T H DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

                        BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1400 OF 2021

BETWEEN:

Bettashetty
Aged about 65 years
S/o. Sannashetty
R/at Neralaguppe Grama
Hunsur Taluk
Mysuru District-571 105
                                         ...Petitioner
(By Sri P.Nataraj u, Advocate)

AND:

The State of Karnataka
By Sub-Insp ector of Excise
Hunsur Sub-Division
Hunsur
Mysuru District
Represented by
State Pub lic Prosecutor
High Court Build ing
Beng aluru-560 001
                                       ...Respondent
(By Sri K.S.Abhijith, HCGP)

     This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under
Section 397(1) read with Section 401 of the Criminal
Procedure Code to set asid e the judgment and order
passed by the Learned Civil Judge and JMFC at Hunsur
in C.C.No.595/2011 dated 31.12.2015 and the Order
passed by the Learned VIII Ad ditional District and
Session   Judge,  Mysuru,    sitting at  Hunsur   in
Crl.A.No.53/2016 dated 03.08.2017 and remand the
                         :: 2 ::


matter to the First Appellate Court to d ispose of the
app eal in accordance with law, by allowing this
Revision Petition.

     This Criminal Revision Petition coming on for
orders through vid eo conferencing this d ay, the Court
mad e the following:

                      O R D E R

Heard Sri. P.Nataraju, learned counsel for the

petitioner on I.A.No.2/2021 filed under Section 5

of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of

1,507 days in filing this revision petition.

I have perused the affidavit filed along with

the application. It is stated that because of the

communication gap between the petitioner and his

counsel, he could not come to know about the

order passed by the appellate Court and that he

came to know about it only when the Police came

near his house in last week of November 2021.

Immediately, he contacted his counsel, verified

the records and came to know that the appeal was

dismissed for default on 03.08.2017 itself.

:: 3 ::

It is to be noted that even though he came to

know about the dismissal of the appeal in the last

week of November 2021, it is not understandable

as to why he waited till 18.12.2021 for filing this

revision petition. The appeal was dismissed for

default on 03.08.2017 itself. The reason given by

the petitioner is not believable. Already, the

connected criminal revision petition, i.e.,

Crl.R.P. No.1403/2021 filed by the petitioner has

stood dismissed on the ground of delay.

Therefore, the application, I.A.No.2/2021 for

condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently,

the criminal revision petition is also dismissed.

I.A.No.1/2021 for suspension of sentence is

also dismissed as the same does not survive for

consideration.

Sd/-

JUDGE RB