Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 84738 (KAR)

SAROJINI NARASINGANAVAR W/O FAKKIRAPPA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/105056/2023 · 2025-07-24

Venkatesh Naik T

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9136 WP No. 105056 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T WRIT PETITION NO. 105056 OF 2023 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SAROJINI NARASINGANAVAR W/O. FAKKIRAPPA, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. 160 RINDA 269, VIBAG NO.1, PYATI ONI, LOKUR, DHARWAD-581206. 2. INAMUL HASSAN S/O. ALLAUDDIN JAMADAR, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: CONTRACTOR, R/O. PLOT NO.53, NEAR RENUKA HOSPITAL, 3RD CROSS, SHAHUNAGAR, BELAGAVI-590010. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. WAQAR AHMED SHAHPURI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY APMC YARD POLICE STATION, Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9136 WP No. 105056 of 2023 BELAGAVI, REPRESENTED BY HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER, OFFICE AT: HIGH COURT DHARWAD. 2. HUNNAPPA S/O. HIRAPPA LAMANI URF RATHOD, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: OTHERS, RESIDENT OF ARIBENCHI TANDA, RAMDURG, NOW AT: BAUXITE ROAD, NEAR AMBEDKAR BHAVAN, BELAGAVI CITY. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. S. B. DEYANNAVAR, ADV. FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, READ WITH 482 OF CR.P.C, PRAYING TO QUASH ALL THE CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS (ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2) IN CRIME NO.126/2023, REGISTERED BY THE APMC YARD POLICE STATION, BELAGAVI, WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE IVTH JMFC., BELAGAV FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 304 READ WITH 34 OF IPC AND ETC. THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9136 WP No. 105056 of 2023 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Learned counsel for the petitioners filed a memo seeking withdrawal of the petition. The contents of withdrawal memo read as under: “The Counsel for petitioner seeks leave from this Hon’ble Court to withdraw the Petition keeping all contentions open with liberty to file fresh Petition, in the interest of justice.” In view of the memo and supporting submission, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE AM/- CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18