Sri Mubarak vs State of Karnataka

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Orders Decided Dec 18, 2025

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1644950

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1644950
Court: Karnataka Orders High Court
Judge: Ravi V Hosmani
Decided On: Dec 18, 2025
Case Number: CRL.RP/111/2019

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sri Mubarak

Respondent

State of Karnataka

Excerpt

-1-in the high court of karnataka at bengalurudated this the 18th day of december, 2025 before the hon'ble mr. justice ravi v hosmani criminal revision petition no. 111 of 2019 between: sri mubarak, s/o habeeb sab, aged about 30 years, r/at nadidada, gauribidanur - 561 208, chickballapura dist …petitioner [by sri moyeenulla abbasi, advocate (ab)] and: state of karnataka rep by the inspector of police, gauribidanur rural police station, gowribidanur -561 208, chickballapura district, rep by spl.p.p. high court of karnataka, bengaluru - 560 001.digitally signed by …respondent geethakumariparlattaya s (by smt. anitha n. girish, hcgp) location: high this crl.rp is filed u/s.397 r/w 401 cr.p.c praying to court of set aside the order of conviction passed against thekarnatakapetitioner dated 26.12.2011, which is produced as annexure-b and call for the entire record in crl.a.no.4/2012 on the file of i additional district and sessions judge, chickballapur and set aside the order of conviction passed u/s.354 and 323 of ipc against petitioner upholding an c.c.no.424/2007 order of conviction passed by the 26.12.2011 principal civil judge and jmfc, gowribidanur u/s.354 of ipc dated 09.06.2014, which is produced as annexure-a and acquit the petitioner by allowing this revision petition. -2-this petition, coming on for admission, this day,order was made therein as under:coram: hon'ble mr. justice ravi v hosmanioral orderit is seen that on previous occasion learned counsel for petitioner had sought time on ground that instructions were incomplete, which was found unjustified. however, time was granted.2. toady also learned counsel for petitioner absent.this would indicate that petitioner is not pursuing revision petition diligently. hence, revision petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. sd/- (ravi v hosmani) judge grd list no.: 1 sl no.: 22

Full Judgment

-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 111 OF 2019 BETWEEN: SRI MUBARAK, S/O HABEEB SAB, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT NADIDADA, GAURIBIDANUR - 561 208, CHICKBALLAPURA DIST …PETITIONER [BY SRI MOYEENULLA ABBASI, ADVOCATE (AB)] AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, GAURIBIDANUR RURAL POLICE STATION, GOWRIBIDANUR -561 208, CHICKBALLAPURA DISTRICT, REP BY SPL.P.P. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001.
Digitally signed by …RESPONDENT GEETHAKUMARI
PARLATTAYA S        (BY SMT. ANITHA N. GIRISH, HCGP)
Location: High            THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 r/w 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
Court of            SET  ASIDE  THE ORDER OF CONVICTION PASSED AGAINST THE
Karnataka
PETITIONER DATED 26.12.2011, WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-B AND CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORD IN CRL.A.NO.4/2012 ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHICKBALLAPUR AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CONVICTION PASSED U/S.354 AND 323 OF IPC AGAINST PETITIONER UPHOLDING AN C.C.NO.424/2007 ORDER OF CONVICTION PASSED BY THE 26.12.2011 PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, GOWRIBIDANUR U/S.354 OF IPC DATED 09.06.2014, WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ACQUIT THE PETITIONER BY ALLOWING THIS REVISION PETITION. -2-
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI

ORAL ORDER

It is seen that on previous occasion learned counsel for petitioner had sought time on ground that instructions were incomplete, which was found unjustified. However, time was granted.

2. Toady also learned counsel for petitioner absent.

This would indicate that petitioner is not pursuing revision petition diligently. Hence, revision petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE GRD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22

Same Court & Year Karnataka Orders · 2025 Same Parties Sri Mubarak vs State of Karnataka Same Judge Ravi V Hosmani