Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11032 (KAR)

MARUTI v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/200901/2025 · 2025-06-26

V Srishananda

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3411 CRL.P No. 200901 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200901 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. MARUTI S/O LATE RACHAPPA THIPPARGI, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: PVT. WORK, R/O VILLAGE ASHTUR, TQ. AND DIST.BIDAR-585403. 2. NAGSHETTY S/O LATE RACHAPPA THIPPARGI, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: PVT. WORK, R/O VILLAGE ASHTUR TQ. AND DIST.BIDAR-585403. 3. ERAMMA D/O LATE RACHAPPA THIPPARGI, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: PVT. WORK, R/O VILLAGE ASHTUR, TQ. AND DIST.BIDAR-585403. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI HANMANTHRAYA SINDOL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH WOMEN POLICE STATION, BIDAR-585403, BY ITS I.O./SHO, REP. BY ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, Digitally signed by RENUKA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3411 CRL.P No. 200901 of 2025 KALABURAGI BENCH-585107. 2. SHIVALEELA D/O MANOHAR MURGE, W/O NAGESH KOLARE, (WRONGLY CLAIMING AS SHIVALEELA W/O BASAWARAJ THIPPARGI), AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O VILLAGE ASHTUR-585403, TQ. AND DIST.BIDAR-585403. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1; SRI ANILKUMAR NAVADAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS, 2023 PRAYING TO, ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL PETITION AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO.5468/2024 ARISING OUT OF FIR IN CRIME NO.76/2022 OF BIDAR WOMEN POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S. 323, 498(A), 504, 506 R/W SEC.34 OF IPC, PENDING BEFORE THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC-II AT BIDAR VIDE ANNEXURE- D. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3411 CRL.P No. 200901 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA) After addressing the arguments at length, Sri Hanmanthraya Sindol, learned counsel for the petitioners files a memo. Memo reads as under: “In the above case, the petitioners wanted to withdraw the above petition, with a liberty to file discharge petition before the Trial Court. Hence the petitioners may be permitted to withdraw the petition, in the interest of justice and equity.” Placing the memo on record, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. In view of disposal of main petition, pending application, if any, does not survive for consideration. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE RSP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42 CT:PK