Mr. Thomas Rodrigues vs The State
2025 Latest Caselaw 8564 Kant

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 8564 Kant
Judgement Date : 18 September, 2025

Karnataka High Court

Mr. Thomas Rodrigues vs The State on 18 September, 2025

                                                  -1-
                                                               NC: 2025:KHC:37503
                                                          CRL.RP No. 1586 of 2022


                       HC-KAR



                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                           DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

                                               BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
                          CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1586 OF 2022
                       BETWEEN:

                       MR. THOMAS RODRIGUES
                       S/O LATE PAUL RODRIGUES
                       AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
                       MARIYA NILAYA GALITHODU AIRODY VILLAGE
                       UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 226
                                                                    ...PETITIONER
                       (BY SRI. K. SHASHIKANTH PRASAD, ADVOCATE)
                       AND:

                       THE STATE
                       BRAHMVARA POLICE STATION
                       UDUPI - 576 213

                       REPRESENTED BY SPP
                       HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed by
                       BENGALURU
PRAMILA G V                                                        ...RESPONDENT
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA           (BY SRI. CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP)
                            THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S. 397 R/W 401 CR.P.C BY THE
                       ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE
                       COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
                       PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.94/2020 DATED 04.11.2022 ON THE FILE
                       OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, UDUPI AND
                       THE JUDGMENT SENTENCE DATED 23.12.2019 PASSED BY THE
                       ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, UDUPI IN C.C.NO.1635/2011
                       AND   THEREBY     REVISION   PETITIONER/ACCUSED     WAS
                       ACQUITTED FROM THE OFFENCE U/S 420,423 OF IPC.

                            THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING,
                       THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
                                         -2-
                                                     NC: 2025:KHC:37503
                                                CRL.RP No. 1586 of 2022


HC-KAR



CORAM:            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE


                                ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed assailing the concurrent finding of

conviction and sentence for an offence under Sections 420

and 423 of Indian Penal Code. The Trial Court sentenced the

accused for simple imprisonment for one month and imposed

fine of Rs.1,000/- for offence under Section 420 and

awarded sentence of six months' simple imprisonment for

offence under Section 423 and awarded fine of Rs.1,000/-.

2. Appeal filed by the accused before the Appellate

Court is dismissed vide judgment dated 04.11.2022

confirming the conviction and sentence passed on

23.12.2019 in C.C.No.1635/2011. Hence, the

petitioner/accused is before this Court.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

HCGP are present. The power of attorney holder of the

victim is before this Court.

4. The records would reveal that the complaint is

filed on the premise that the petitioner/accused sold the

NC: 2025:KHC:37503

HC-KAR

property to the purchaser/original complainant with an

assurance that the property is free from encumbrance.

However, the complainant alleged that later it transpired that

the property was already mortgaged to the co-operative

bank and the bank initiated for recovery of dues from the

seller/accused.

5. The Trial Court convicted the accused so also the

Appellate Court.

6. Now the power of attorney

holder/purchaser/complainant is before this Court. Accused

is also before the Court.

7. An application is filed under Section 320(2) of

Criminal Procedure Code recording the terms of settlement

and both parties seek leave of the Court to compound the

offence. The complainant has paid Rs.2.00 lakhs the

outstanding loan amount of the petitioner/accused. The

accused has offered to pay Rs.5.00 lakhs towards full and

final discharge of claim of the complainant and copy of the

Demand Draft for Rs.5.00 lakhs is enclosed along with the

NC: 2025:KHC:37503

HC-KAR

joint memo. The said Demand Draft is dated 15.09.2025

drawn on Karnataka Bank, Udupi.

8. The complainant acknowledges receipt of the

original Demand Draft. Copies of the original Demand Draft

so also the General Power of Attorney are enclosed along

with the memo.

9. This Court has also noticed that the dispute is

relating to the purchase of the land. The complainant is

compensated by the accused.

10. Under the circumstances, this Court does not find

any impediment to accept the terms of settlement. Hence

the following:

ORDER

(i) The petition is allowed.

(ii) The impugned judgment dated 04.11.2022 passed by

the Sessions Judge, Udupi in Crl.Appeal No.04/2020 so

also the judgment dated 23.12.2019 passed by the

NC: 2025:KHC:37503

HC-KAR

Additional Civil Judge, Udupi in C.C.No.1635/2011 are

set-aside.