Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1050 (KAR)

SRI PRAMOD S V @ PRAMOD GOWDA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/12533/2023 · 2026-03-23

M Nagaprasanna

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16404 CRL.P No. 12533 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12533 OF 2023 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. SRI PRAMOD S V @ PRAMOD GOWDA S/O LATE S M VENKATAPATHI, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, CEO OF EAST POINT MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL, R/AT NO 9, 80 FT ROAD, KALYAN NAGAR, HRBR LAYOUT, BANGALORE 560043 2. SRI RAJIV VENKATAPATHI GOWDA S/O LATE S M VENKATAPATHI, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, CEO OF EAST POINT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY R/AT NO 9, 80 FT ROAD, KALYAN NAGAR, HRBR LAYOUT, BANGALORE 560043 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. THIMMEGOWDA N., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16404 CRL.P No. 12533 of 2023 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY AVALAHALLI POLICE STATION, BANGALORE 560049, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE 560001 2. SRI PRASHANT S/O VENUGOPAL, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT R F ROAD, SHAKTHINAGAR, MALUR, KOLAR DIST 563130 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE ENTIRE FIR IN CR.NO.448/2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE REGISTERED BY AVALAHALLI POLICE STATION, AT BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT U/S.363, 343, 323, 354, 506, 504 R/W SEC.149 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16404 CRL.P No. 12533 of 2023 ORAL ORDER 1. Learned Addl. State Public Prosecutor on instructions would submit that the charges have been framed and the trial is on and hence, the petition would not be entertainable at this juncture. 2. In the light of the charges being framed, the entertainment of the petition will run foul of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of MINAKSHI BALA V. SUDHIR KUMAR1. 3. Reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail of such remedy, as is available in law, and to urge all the contentions before the concerned Court, at the relevant point in time, the petition stands disposed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE RK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 113 1 (1994) 4 SCC 142