M/S PATHAK DEVELOPERS PVT LTD., vs SUJATHA S Advocate - SHIVARAMU H.C — CRL.RP/1524/2025

Case under None Section NONE. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 09th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: KAHC010664702025

Filing Number

CRL.RP/1460/2025

Filing Date

09-Oct-2025

Registration No

CRL.RP/1524/2025

Registration Date

13-Oct-2025

Judge

H.p.sandesh

Coram

H.p.sandesh

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRL.RP ( 114 )

Sub-Category

397(Cr.PC) / 438(BNSS)-U/S 397/-U/S 438 ( 11 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

09-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

None Section NONE

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M/S PATHAK DEVELOPERS PVT LTD.,

    Adv. RAJATH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SUJATHA S Advocate - SHIVARAMU H.C

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Jun-2026

    H.p.sandeshView PDF

    Case Summary: The High Court of Karnataka dismissed Pathak Developers Pvt Ltd.'s criminal revision petition challenging their conviction and sentence dated 22.02.2024. Justice H.P. Sandesh held that since the petitioner failed to comply with a conditional interim order dated 12.01.2026 within the stipulated four-week period, and the revision petition had not yet been admitted, no grounds existed to entertain the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Jan-2026

    Admission

    Ravi V Hosmani

  4. 18-Dec-2025

    Hearing - Interlocutory Appln

    Ravi V Hosmani

  5. 16-Oct-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 09-Oct-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRL.RP/1524/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The High Court of Karnataka dismissed Pathak Developers Pvt Ltd.'s criminal revision petition challenging their conviction and sentence dated 22.02.2024. Justice H.P. Sandesh held that since the petitioner failed to comply with a conditional interim order dated 12.01.2026 within the stipulated four-week period, and the revision petition had not yet been admitted, no grounds existed to entertain the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case