AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
H.P. Sandesh, J
This revision petition is listed before the Court with regard to the maintainability of this revision petition.
The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners submits that the order passed by the Trial Court on I.A.No.1/2024 filed under Section 430(1) of Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) wherein prayer is made to suspend the operation and execution of the sentence dated 07.11.2024 passed by the XVIII Additional Judge and ACJM Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru in C.C.No.4570/2023 is not an interlocutory order and contend that the order affects the right of the revision petitioners. Hence, the revision petition is maintainable.
The office has raised the objection that in view of Section 397(2) of Cr.P.C, the revision petition is not maintainable against the order passed on I.A.No.1/2024.
Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and having perused the office objection regarding maintainability, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the order of the Trial Court affects the right of the revision petitioners and it will not amounts to any interlocutory order. The application filed before the Trial Court is under Section 430(1) of BNSS praying to suspend the operation and execution of the sentence dated 07.11.2024. Having perused the order passed by the Trial Court wherein the Trial Court allowed the said application subject to condition that the appellant shall deposit 20% of the fine amount and to execute personal bond for the balance of the amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court on or before 26.12.2024 and also made it clear that in case of non-compliance of condition (i) stated above, he shall immediately surrender before the Trial Court to undergo the sentence. When such conditional order is passed by the Trial Court on the IA while suspending the sentence entertaining the interlocutory application filed by the petitioners, now the very contention of the counsel for the revision petitioners is that the said order affects the right of the parties and hence, revision petition is maintainable cannot be accepted and nature of order is only an interlocutory order. Hence, office objection is upheld. Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed as not maintainable.