Sri. Suresh vs State By Station House Officer
2023 Latest Caselaw 1086 Kant

                                         -1-
                                                      CRL.RP No. 87 of 2016




                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                    DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

                                       BEFORE

                        THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

                    CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 87 OF 2016

             BETWEEN:

             SRI. SURESH
             S/O. LATE EREGOWDA,
             AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
             RESIDING AT SIDDAPURA VILLAGE,
             HALEBEEDU HOBLI, BELUR TALUK,
             HASSAN DISTRICT.
                                                               ...PETITIONER
             (BY SRI. JAYALAKSHMAMMA K B., ADVOCATE)

             AND:

             STATE BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER
             AMRUTHUR POLICE STATION,
             KUNIGAL,
             REPRESENTED BY
             THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
             HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
             HIGH COURT BUILDING,
             BANGALORE.
Digitally                                                    ...RESPONDENT
signed by
SUMA         (BY SRI. KRISHNA KUMAR K.K., ADVOCATE)
Location:
HIGH COURT         THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 READ WITH 401
OF
KARNATAKA    CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE VI
             ADDL. DIST. AND S.J., TUMAKURU DATED 15.10.2015 PASSED IN
             CRL.A.NO.37/2014, CONSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
             26.02.2014 PASSED BY THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
             KUNIGAL IN C.C.NO.717/2012, DISMISS THE COMPLAINT AND
             ACQUIT THE PETITIONER BY ALLOWING THIS REVISION WITH
             COSTS.
                  THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
             COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                     -2-
                                                CRL.RP No. 87 of 2016




                                   ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she has

instructions to appear in this petition and that due to the

reasons beyond her control, she could not appear on the

previous date of hearing, as a result of which, this Court had

issued notice to the petitioner. She further submits that she is

ready to argue the revision petition. Hence, the petition is

heard and taken up for final disposal.

The petitioner has challenged the judgment of conviction

dated 26.02.2014 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and

JMFC, Kunigal in C.C.No.717/2012 convicting the petitioner for

the offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC and Section

134(A) read with Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

and sentence to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- within one month for the

offence punishable under Sections 279 of IPC and Rs.250/-

within one month for the offence punishable under Section

134(A) read with Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,

failing which, he was sentenced to undergo simple

imprisonment for a period of one month. The petitioner has

also challenged the correctness of the judgment dated

CRL.RP No. 87 of 2016

15.10.2015 passed by the VI Additional District and Sessions

Judge, Tumkur in Crl.A.No.37/2014.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

fine amount of Rs.1,250/- was paid belatedly on 08.04.2014.

She therefore contends that in view of the default sentence

ordered by the trial Court, the petitioner is under the threat of

being arrested.

3. The order sheet placed on record by the learned

counsel for the petitioner discloses that the petitioner had paid

the fine amount of Rs.1,250/- on 08.04.2014.

4. In that view of the matter, the judgment of

conviction and the order of sentence passed by the trial Court

is upheld. However, since the petitioner had paid the fine, he is

discharged from the default sentence to undergo simple

imprisonment for a period of 30 days.

5. In view of the above, this Revision Petition is

disposed off holding that in view of the payment of fine of

Rs.1,250/- by the petitioner on 08.04.2014, he was fulfilled the

CRL.RP No. 87 of 2016

sentence and hence, he is discharged from undergoing the

default sentence of one year.

The trial Court is directed to refund cash surety deposited

by the petitioner.

Sd/-

JUDGE NR/-