SADAK ALI @ SADAK ALI HARIKERI AND ANR v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR
CRL.P/201267/2024 · 2025-07-08
V Srishananda
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 11554 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 11554 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3693 CRL.P No. 201267 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201267 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN:
1. SADAK ALI @ SADAK ALI HARIKERI, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCC. GOVT. OFFICIAL - VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT, OFFICE OF NADA KARYALAYA KOWTHAL, TQ. SIRVAR, DIST. RAICHUR.
2. RAJAKUMAR S/O LATE JAMBAYYA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC: GOVT. OFFICIAL, NOW WORKING AS DEPUTY TAHASILDAR, NADA KARYALAYA, KOWTHAL, TQ. SIRVAR, DIST. RAICHUR. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SRINIVAS B. JOSHI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY KOWTHAL POLICE STATION,
Digitally signed by SUMITRA SHERIGAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3693 CRL.P No. 201267 of 2024
TQ. SIRVAR, DIST. RAICHUR, REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH.
2. SHEKHARAPPA S/O SHARANAPPA POOJARI, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HUSENAPUR, TQ. SIRVAR, DIST. RAICHUR. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. ARATI PATIL, HCGP, FOR R1;
SRI J. AUGUSTIN, ADVOCATE, FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. (OLD) / UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS, PRAYING TO QUASH THE CASE IN CRIME NO.57/2024 OF KOWTHAL POLICE STATION, TQ. SIRVAR, DIST. RAICHUR, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 420, 465, 468, 471 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF AND JMFC Court, MANVI.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA)
1. Case called out.
2. None present on behalf of the petitioners.
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3693 CRL.P No. 201267 of 2024
3. Sufficient time has already been granted for the petitioners’ counsel to address the arguments. He has failed to appear before the Court. In fact, cost is also imposed by this Court on the previous date of hearing. Cost is not paid.
4. Sri J. Augustin, learned counsel, for respondent No.2 submits that the petitioners are not interested in prosecuting the matter properly and they have never appeared before the Court.
5. Submission of Sri Augustin is corroborated with the order-sheet.
6. Noting the same, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/- (V. SRISHANANDA) JUDGE
SBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14 CT:PK