[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Ms. Saira Banu vs State Of Karnataka on 13 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:9050-DB
RP No. 409 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
REVIEW PETITION NO. 409 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
MS. SAIRA BANU
D/O. LATE M. HASSAN,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 66, 4TH CROSS,
N. NAGENAHALLI,
Digitally signed by
PANKAJA S BENGALURU-560 077.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA ...PETITIONER
(BY MRS. SAIRA BANU, PARTY IN PERSON)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:9050-DB
RP No. 409 of 2025
HC-KAR
TO GOVERNMETN OF KARNATAKA
HOME DEPARTMENT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY MRS. SWETHA KRISHNAPPA, AGA FOR R1)
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.114
R/W ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC 1908, PRAYING TO REVIEW
THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19.08.2025 PASSED IN CCC
NO.1357/2024, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT
ON 31.01.2026 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY,
RAJESH RAI K, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:9050-DB
RP No. 409 of 2025
HC-KAR
CAV JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K)
This review petition is directed against the order dated
19.08.2025 passed by this Court in CCC No.1357/2024,
wherein this Court dropped the contempt proceedings.
2. We have heard Ms.Saira Banu, Party-in-
person/review petitioner and perused the entire materials on
record.
3. It is the primary contention of the review petitioner
that, the findings of this Court in the contempt petition that the
complainant has not placed any documents to substantiate that
interim order passed in W.P.No.13992/2024 by the learned
Single Judge of this Court was not communicated to respondent
Nos.2 and 3 on 28.05.2024 before execution of the order
passed in Misc.No.MAG(4)/MISC/SC/CR/38/22-23. According
to her, the interim order was served to respondent Nos.2 and 3
between 5:00 - 6:00 p.m. on 28.05.2024. As such, she prays
to review the impugned order.
4. On perusal of the impugned order passed by this
Court in Contempt petition, it is seen that the review petitioner
NC: 2026:KHC:9050-DB
HC-KAR
has argued at length on the aforesaid aspects of the matter and
the same have been dealt with by this Court in detail.
5. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay
Kumar Agarwal Vs. State Tax Officers reported in 2023
SCC OnLine SC 1406 by referring the case of Sajjan Singh v.
State of Rajasthan, 1964 SCC OnLine SC 25, as held in
paragraph 10 as under:
"10. It is also well-settled that a party is
not entitled to seek a review of a judgment
delivered by this Court merely for the purpose of
a rehearing and a fresh decision of the case. The
normal principle is that a judgment pronounced
by the Court is final, and departure from that
principle is justified only when circumstances of a
substantial and compelling character make it
necessary to do so."
6. Further, in the said judgment, the Hon'ble Apex
Court by referring Parsion Devi V. Sumitri Devi reported in
(1997) 8 SCC 715 as held in paragraph 11 as under:
"Under Order 47 Rule 1CPC a judgment may
be open to review inter alia if there is a mistake or
an error apparent on the face of the record. An
error which is not self-evident and has to be
detected by a process of reasoning, can hardly be
said to be an error apparent on the face of the
record justifying the court to exercise its power of
NC: 2026:KHC:9050-DB
HC-KAR
review under Order 47 Rule 1CPC. In exercise of
the jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1CPC it is not
permissible for an erroneous decision to be
"reheard and corrected". A review petition, it must
be remembered has a limited purpose and cannot
be allowed to be "an appeal in disguise"."
7. Applying the above dictum laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court to the facts and circumstances of this case, we are
of the view that there is no apparent error on the face of the
record/order dated 19.08.2025 passed by this Court in CCC
No.1357/2024.
8. Accordingly, the review petition is devoid of merits
and the same is dismissed. In view of dismissal of the petition,
pending I.As., if any, do not survive for consideration and the
same are disposed of.
SD/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN)
JUDGE
SD/-
(RAJESH RAI K)
JUDGE
HKV
List No.: 19 Sl No.: 1
