Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 67591 (KAR)

SRI. A. M. HANUMANTHEGOWDA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/12695/2023 · 2025-07-30

J M Khazi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29387 CRL.P No. 12695 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12695 OF 2023 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. A. M. HANUMANTHEGOWDA SON OF LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT SRI LAKSHMI FARM, ULLALU VILLAGE, ULLALU POST, 100 FEET ROAD, 4TH BLOCK, SIR M. VISVESHWARAIAH LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 110. 2. SRI. H. VENKATESH SON OF HANUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 276, 1ST MAIN, II STAGE, MARUTHINAGARA, BENGALURU-560 056. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NAGAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHO, TAVAREKERE POLICE STATION, TAVAREKERE, MAGADI CIRCLE, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29387 CRL.P No. 12695 of 2023 2. SRI. SHANTHILAL MUTHA SON OF LATE CHUNNILAL MUTHA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, RESIDING AT SEEGEHALLI GATE, MAGADI MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B.LAKSHMAN, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.239/2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CHARGE SHEET VIDE C.C.NO.10261/2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-B, REGISTERED BY TAVAREKERE P.S., MAGADI CIRCLE, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT UNDER SEC.143,147,420,323,506,149 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE C.J.M AT BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU (RAMANAGARA). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI ORAL ORDER No representation for petitioner. 2. No representation for petitioner even in the afternoon session. 3. This matter is of the year 2023. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29387 CRL.P No. 12695 of 2023 4. Vide order dated 18.07.2025, as a last chance, a week's time was granted to comply with the office objections, failing which necessary orders would be passed for dismissal of the petition. 5. Despite the same, office objections are not complied with. It appears petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the petition. 6. Hence, petition is dismissed for default. Sd/- (J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE RR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20