Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12712 (KAR)

SRI P RAYACHAND v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/172/2024 · 2026-03-25

M Nagaprasanna

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17002 WP No. 172 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 172 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. P. RAYACHAND S/O PUKHRAJ, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, R/AT NO. 130, MILLERS ROAD, COX TOWN, BENGALURU - 560 005. 2. SRI. BABU LAL S/O GEESULAL, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/AT NO. 61, RAMA IYENGAR ROAD, V.V. PURAM, BENGALURU - 560 004. 3. SRI. KISHANLAL KOTHARI S/O LATE CHANDMAL AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/AT NO. 24, CAR STREET, HALASURU, BENGALURU - 560 008. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. H.R. ANANTHA KRISHNA MURTHY, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17002 WP No. 172 of 2024 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE, FOR MAHADEVAPURA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU - 560 0016. 2. SRI. C. SIVAKARTHIC S/O C. MALLIKARJUNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT DR NO. 10-104-G40, NEAR SSS MANDIR, JAWAHAR NAGAR COLONY MARKA PURAM, PRAKASHAM DISTRICT - 523 316 ANDHARA PRADESH. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SEC 482 OF CR.P.C/ 528 OF BNNS PRAYING TO QUASH THE FRAMING OF CHARGES AGAINST THE PETITIONERS UNDER SECTION 304A OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860, THE DIRECTIONS OF THE XLIII ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, MAYO HALL, AT - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17002 WP No. 172 of 2024 BENGALURU, IN C.C. NO. 51636/2020 UNDER ANNEXURE-D AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor on instructions would submit that the charges have been framed and the petition would not be entertainable at this juncture. 2. In the light of the charges being framed, the entertainment of the petition would run foul of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of MINAKSHI BALA V. SUDHIR KUMAR1 and the issue being the one punishable under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the projection being that the compound has fallen due to heavy floods, the concerned Court shall consider the same and pass necessary orders, in accordance with law and close the proceedings, 1 (1994) 4 SCC 142 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17002 WP No. 172 of 2024 within an outer limit of four months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. 3. Reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail of such remedy, as is available in law, the petition stands disposed. All contentions remain open. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE JY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 81