Dismissed¶40

Priscilla Patrao v. Sri Ravi Richard D'Souza

Karnataka HC29 Jun 2026CRL.RP/1601/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRL.RP No. 1601 of 2025, High Court of Karnataka (H.P. Sandesh J., 29.06.2026): revision petition challenging the Sessions Court judgment dated 27.09.2025 in Crl.A No.233/2025 setting aside a protection order over residential premises at Mangaluru; dismissed for non-prosecution — counsel absent, petitioner had vacated the premises and taken back the case papers without engaging fresh counsel; no merits adjudicated; no case law cited.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner, having vacated the premises and taken back the case papers without engaging another advocate, is not interested in prosecuting the matter. ¶39

Priscilla Patrao Vs Sri Ravi Richard D'Souza — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:32175 CRL.RP No. 1601 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1601 OF 2025

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

PRISCILLA PATRAO,

¶10

AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, W/O RAVI RICHARD D'SOUZA,

¶11

KUM AVIELLE D'SOUOZA, AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN PETITIONER NO.1, BOTH ARE RESIDING Digitally signed AT 3-3, NEAR DEREBAI CHURCH, by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH PRASHANTH NAGAR, COURT OF ASHOKNAGAR POST, KARNATAKA MANGALORE - 575 006.

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SRI. GANAPATHI BHAT., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

¶14

AND:

¶15

SRI. RAVI RICHARD D'SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:32175 CRL.RP No. 1601 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

S/O CHARLES D'SOUZA, R/AT FLAT NO.501,MUGRODY ENCLAVE, GANDHINAGAR, KULOOR-KAVOOR ROAD, MANGALORE - 575 015.

¶20

…RESPONDENT

¶21

(BY SRI. S.RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE)

¶22

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 CR.PC (FILED U/S 438 R/W 442 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT DATED 27.09.2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF VI ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANGALORE D.K IN CRL.A NO.233/2025 IN SO FAR AS IT PERTAINS TO SETTING ASIDE PROTECTION ORDER GRANTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS CONCERNING THE RESIDENTIAL PREMISES BEARING D.NO.3-3, SITUATED NEAR DEREBAIL CHURCH, PRASHANT NAGAR, ASHOKNAGAR POST MANGALURU.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner is absent.

¶27

The learned counsel who had appeared for the

¶28

petitioner earlier made the submission before this Court on 13.01.2026 that he has given back the case papers to the

¶29

¶30

NC: 2026:KHC:32175 CRL.RP No. 1601 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

petitioner for the purpose of engaging the services of some other Advocate. Hence, the Court directed to list the matter on 20.01.2026. On that day also there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner.

¶33

The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the petitioner has already vacated the house in which the petitioner was residing and also produced the order dated 12.12.2025 passed in Misc.No.27/2025 by the Assistant Commissioner and Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mangaluru Sub-Division, Dakshina Kannada.

¶34

The statement given by the petitioner No.1 before the Police Inspector, Kaavur, the letter dated 20.01.2026 issued by the Police Inspector, Kaavur Police Station, Mangaluru, filed before the Court by the learned counsel for the respondent are taken on record.

¶35

The petitioner is also not pursuing the matter even after taking back the case papers, and he has not engaged any counsel to prosecute the case. In view of the

¶36

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:32175 CRL.RP No. 1601 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

endorsement produced before the Court and having vacated the premises, it appears that, the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter.

¶40