Karnataka High Court
Esi Corporation vs Sri H Narayana Rao on 28 June, 2024
Author: V Srishananda
Bench: V Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:24335
CRL.RP No. 601 of 2015
C/W CRL.RP No. 602 of 2015
CRL.RP No. 603 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.601 OF 2015
C/W CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.602 OF 2015
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.603 OF 2015
IN CRL.RP NO.601/2015
BETWEEN:
1. ESI CORPORATION
NO.10, BINNI FIELDS,
BINNIPET,
BANGALORE-560 023.
REP. BY INSURANCE INSPECTOR
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI K KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI H NARAYANA RAO
PROPRIETOR,
Digitally
signed by M/S HOTEL SRI HARSHA,
MALATESH NO. 168, N.T. PET,
KC MYSORE ROAD,
Location: BANGALORE -560 002.
HIGH ...RESPONDENT
COURT OF (BY SRI SATYA NARAYANA SHASTRI FOR
KARNATAKA SMT. SANDYA SHASTRI C N, ADVOCATES)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397(1) R/W 401 CR.P.C
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE AND DISMISS THE JUDGMENT DATED
24.3.2015 ON THE FILE OF THE P.O., F.T.C.-X, BENGALURU
CITY IN CRL.A.NO.966/2005 AND CONFIRM THE JUDGMENT
DATED 22.6.2005 ON THE FILE OF THE SPL. COURT FOR
ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.601/2002.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:24335
CRL.RP No. 601 of 2015
C/W CRL.RP No. 602 of 2015
CRL.RP No. 603 of 2015
IN CRL.RP NO.602/2015
BETWEEN
ESI CORPORATION
NO.10, BINNI FIELDS,
BINNIPET,
BANGALORE-560 023.
REP. BY INSURANCE INSPECTOR
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI K KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND
SRI H NARAYANA RAO
PROPRIETOR,
M/S HOTEL SRI HARSHA,
NO. 168, N.T. PET,
MYSORE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 002.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SATYANARAYANA SHASTRI FOR
SMT.SANDYA SHASTRI C N, ADVOCATES)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401
CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE AND DISMISS THE JUDGMENT
DATED 24.3.2015 ON THE FILE OF THE P.O., F.T.C.-X,
BENGALURU CITY IN CRL.A.NO.967/2005 AND CONFIRM THE
JUDGMENT DATED 22.6.2005 ON THE FILE OF THE SPL. COURT
FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.308/2003.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:24335
CRL.RP No. 601 of 2015
C/W CRL.RP No. 602 of 2015
CRL.RP No. 603 of 2015
IN CRL.RP NO.603/2015
BETWEEN
ESI CORPORATION
NO.10, BINNI FIELDS,
BINNIPET,
BANGALORE-560 023.
REP. BY INSURANCE INSPECTOR
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI K KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND
SRI H NARAYANA RAO
PROPRIETOR,
M/S HOTEL SRI HARSHA,
NO. 168, N.T. PET,
MYSORE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 002.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SATYANARAYANA SHASTRI, ADVOCATE FOR SMT.
SANDYA SHASTRI C N, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401
CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE AND DISMISS THE JUDGMENT
DATED 24.3.2015 ON THE FILE OF THE P.O., F.T.C.-X,
BENGALURU CITY IN CRL.A.NO.968/2005 AND CONFIRM THE
JUDGMENT DATED 22.6.2005 ON THE FILE OF THE SPL. COURT
FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BANGALORE IN
C.C.NO.1043/2004.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:24335
CRL.RP No. 601 of 2015
C/W CRL.RP No. 602 of 2015
CRL.RP No. 603 of 2015
ORDER
Sri K.Krishnappa, learned counsel for the revision
petitioner present. Sri Satyanarayana Shastri, learned counsel
for respondent present.
2. After hearing for some time, this Court noticed that
respondent/accused was convicted before the learned Trial
Magistrate and by the judgment of the First Appellate Court,
stood acquitted of all the charges.
3. Against the Order of acquittal, appropriate remedy is to
file an appeal.
4. Accordingly, learned counsel for the petitioner filed
memos in all the above revision petitions seeking permission of
the Court to file appropriate appeal, in accordance with law and
sought for exclusion of time spent in these petitions under
Section 14 of the Limitation Act, insofar as computation of
limitation is concerned. He also sought for return of certified
copies of the documents.
NC: 2024:KHC:24335
5. Having seen that appeal is maintainable against the order
of acquittal and not revision, memos are accepted.
6. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
(i) These revision petitions are dismissed as
withdrawn with liberty to file appeal before
the appropriate forum, in accordance with
law.
(ii) Time spent in these revision petitions shall be
excluded for the purpose of computation of
limitation period as is found in Section 14 of
the Limitation Act.
(iii) Office is directed to return certified copy of
the impugned orders, after keeping
photocopies thereof.
Sd/-
JUDGE
kcm
