Dismissed¶36

Mr.Sadashiva, v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Oct 2025CRL.RP/1161/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Surety's criminal revision petition (S.397/401 CrPC; S.438/442 BNSS) against order forfeiting surety bond, re-issuing NBW and registering separate Crl.Misc. for bond recovery held not maintainable: forfeiture order is interlocutory, determines no rights; recall grounds (accused present, summons not served) to be urged before trial Court. Dismissed on office objection. Keywords: surety bond forfeiture, non-bailable warrant, interlocutory order, maintainability, S.307 IPC, Udupi.

What did the court decide?

An order of forfeiture of surety on absence of the accused is an interlocutory order and there is no determination of rights of parties; therefore the revision petition against such an order is not maintainable. ¶35

Mr.Sadashiva, Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal revision petition filed by the surety against the order dated 20.12.2024 directing re-issuance of non-bailable warrant, notice to surety, forfeiture of surety bond and registration of a separate criminal miscellaneous petition for recovery of bond amount is maintainable.

¶32

Court's answer

¶35

Ratio / Principle

Grounds that the accused was very much present at the address and that non-appearance was on account of non-service of summons are to be urged before the trial Court while seeking recall of the impugned order, not in this revision petition.

¶35

Key takeaways

Office objection sustained; the revision petition is dismissed as not maintainable.ratio¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Revision Petition (Karnataka High Court, Ravi V Hosmani, J., 08.10.2025) filed by sureties under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C (Section 438 r/w 442 BNSS) challenging the order dated 20.12.2024 of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Udupi directing re-issuance of a non-bailable warrant, notice to surety, forfeiture of the surety bond and registration of Crl.Misc.No.251/2024 (pending before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Udupi) for recovery of the bond amount upon the accused's continued absence, in a matter arising from Cr.No.24/2022 and SC No.21/2025 for an offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC registered by Malpe Police Station. Held: an order of forfeiture of surety on the accused's absence is an interlocutory order involving no determination of rights of parties, so the revision petition is not maintainable; grounds that the accused was present and that non-appearance resulted from non-service of summons must be urged before the trial Court while seeking recall of the impugned order. Office objection sustained; petition dismissed as not maintainable.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:39630 CRL.RP No. 1161 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI

¶8

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1161 OF 2025

¶9

(397(Cr.PC) / 438(BNSS))

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

MR.SADASHIVA, S/O SHEENA POOJARY, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/O SHIVAGIRI NILAYA, SUBRAYA BETTU, ANJARU VILLAGE AND POST, PANCHANABETTU, UDUPI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT, KARNATAKA.

¶12

MR.RATHNAKARA POOJARY, S/O BABU, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/A NO.1-140,

¶13

Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

NAVAGRAMA COLONY, HANEHALLI VILLAGE, BARKURU, BRAMHAVARA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT, KARNATAKA.

¶15

…PETITIONERS

¶16

(BY SRI NAVEEN KUMARA P., ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHO, MALPE POLICE STATION, UDUPI DISTRICT,

¶19

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:39630 CRL.RP No. 1161 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALUR-560 001.

¶23

MR.ADHIKANTH MALIK, S/O VAIDYANATH MAILK, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, PERMANENT R/O BASUDEPURA, BRADRAK DISTRICT, ORISSA STATE.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SMT. ANITHA GIRISHA, HCGP)

¶26

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 CR.P.C (U/S 438 R/W 442 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE ORDER DATED 20.12.2024 PASSED BY LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, UDUPI FOR REGISTERING CRL.MISC.NO.251/2024 IN CR.NO.24/2022 AND SC NO. 21/2025, FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 307 OF IPC REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT/MALPE POLICE STATION, ALONG WITH CRL.MISC.NO.251/2024, PENDING ON FILE OF HONBLE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, UDUPI.

¶27

THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR HEARING ON I.A., THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:39630 CRL.RP No. 1161 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

Office has raised office objection regarding maintainability

¶33

of revision petition against order directing re-issuance of NonBailable Warrant, notice to surety, forfeiture of surety bond and registration of separate criminal miscellaneous petition for recovery of bond amount, in view of continued absence of accused.

¶34

Heard Smt.Anitha, learned HCGP for respondents.

¶35

This Revision Petition is filed by surety. At outset, order of forfeiture of surety on absence of accused would be an interlocutory order and there does not appear to be any determination of rights of parties. Grounds urged that accused was very much present at address and non-appearance was on account of non-service of summons would require to be urged before trial Court while seeking for recall of order impugned.

¶36

In view of above, office objection sustained, Revision Petition is dismissed as not maintainable.

¶37

Sd/(RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE

¶38

AV/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12

Mr.Sadashiva, v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Sadashiva, v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Nusrath Azra Vs the Commissioner

Shri.Murali Dorai Vs Bengaluru Electricity Supply Company Limited

Sri.P. Vijay @ Viojayraj Vs the Assistant Executive Engineer

Yagnika Chaitanya Cotha Vs Chaitanya v Cotha

Nagaraja Vs State of Karnataka

Sunil Kumar @ Bomb Sunil Vs the State of Karnataka