Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 77527 (KAR)

SAMPATH KUMAR N D v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/25448/2022 · 2025-08-06

J M Khazi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30890 WP No. 25448 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI WRIT PETITION NO. 25448 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SAMPATH KUMAR N D S/O DAMODAR NAIR M AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT NEAR ANJANEYA TEMPLE HOUSING BOARD, CHOUDLU, SOMWARPET SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU-571236 2. B M SANTHOSH S/O B C MALLESH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/A GUDDE HOSURU, KUSHALANAGARA HOBLI BASAVANAHALLI, KODAGU-571234 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MAHADEVA R K, ADVOCATE-ABSENT) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KUSHALANAGAR RURAL P S KUSHALANAGAR CIRCLE KODAGU DISTRICT-571236 2. SHASHIDHAR V P S/O PUTTAIAH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30890 WP No. 25448 of 2022 R/A 4TH BLOCK, KUSHALANAGAR KODAGU-571234 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.N.ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R1) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND QUASH THE FIR IN RESPECT OF THESE PETITIONER IN CRIME NO.85/2022 DATED 18.08.2022 OF KUSHALANGAR RURAL POLICE STATION FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 158,506,341,120B,355, 146,147,151,141,339,340 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF HONBLE ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT KUSHALNAGAR VIDE ANNEXURE-A. 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 petitioners. 2. No representation for petitioners even in the afternoon session. 3. This matter is of the year 2022. 4. Vide order dated 30.06.2025, as a last chance, a week's time was granted to do the needful, failing which - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30890 WP No. 25448 of 2022 necessary orders would be passed for dismissal of the petition. 5. Despite the same, needful has not been done. It appears petitioners are not interested in prosecuting the petition. 6. Hence, petition is dismissed for default. Sd/- (J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE RR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24