IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.648 OF 2011 C/W CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.651 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.648 OF 2011 BETWEEN:-
SMT LAKSHMAMMA W/O VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT MYLANAHALLI VILLAGE, B.K.HALLI POST, JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT.
(BY SRI: A G NAGARAJA, ADVOCATE-ABSENT) AND SMT SUBBAMMA W/O C GOPALAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT NO.479, 3RD CROSS II BLOCK, III PHASE BSK III STAGE, BANGALORE 85 ...PETITIONER …RESPONDENT (BY SRI:M.KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI: K G LAKSHMIPATHI, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 401 CRPC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 21.5.2010/26.5.2010 PASSED BY THE C.M.M., BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.11934/2004 AND ORDER DATED 30.03.2011 PASSED BY THE P.O, FTC COURT-XVII, BANGALORE CITY IN CRL.A.NO.477/2010.
IN CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.651 OF 2011 BETWEEN:-
1. SMT. VENKATAMMA W/O ASHWATHAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 2 . SRI NARAYANASWAMY S/O LATE SUBBANNA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, 3 . SRI S. RAMAPPA S/O LATE SUBBANNA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 4 . SRI SRINIVASA @ REVANNA S/O LATE SUBBANNA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF MAILANAHALLI VILLAGE, B.K.HALLI POST, JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE.
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI: M S RAJENDRA PRASAD, ADVOCATE-ABSENT) AND SMT. SUBBAMMA W/O C GOPALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO 479, 3RD A CROSS, II BLOCK, III PHASE, BSK III STAGE, BANGALORE-85 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI:M.KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR K G LAKSHMIPATHI, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397(1) CRPC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 30.03.2011 PASSED BY THE P.O., FTC-XVII, BANGALORE CITY IN CRL.A.NO.480/2010 AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT DT:26.5.2010 PASSED IN C.M.M. BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.11934/2004.
****** THESE CRIMINAL REVISIONS PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R The accused have not made out any ground warranting interference by this Court under section 397 Cr.P.C. The contentions urged in these petitions relate to re-appreciation of evidence which is not permissible under section 397 Cr.P.C.
2. Hence, the criminal revision petitions are dismissed.
*mn/-
Sd/- JUDGE