Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1400 (KAR)

SHRI L NAGARAJU v. SHRI RANGE GOWDA

CCC/1577/2017 · 2026-03-26

Anu Sivaraman, Tara Vitasta Ganju

Contempt Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17151-DB CCC No. 1577 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 1577 OF 2017 BETWEEN: SHRI L NAGARAJU S/O SHRI LAKSHMAN (LATE) R/O BALANAKATTE, SY.NO.120 KASABA HOBLI, BEHIND RUDRAIAH CHOULTRY TUMAKURU-571 112 …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. L.NAGARAJU, ADV. - ABSENT) AND: 1. DR. E.V.RAMANA REDDY, IAS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT. REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDINGS BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. SHRI K.P.MOHAN RAJ, IAS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMAKURU DISTRICT TUMAKURU-571 112. Digitally signed by RAKSHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17151-DB CCC No. 1577 of 2017 (ACCUSED NO.1 & 2 DELETED AS PER COURT ORDER DATED 13.10.2017) 3. SHRI RANGE GOWDA TAHSILDAR, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU-571 112 …ACCUSED (BY SRI. ASHUTOSH MISHRA, ADV. FOR SRI. VISHNU HEGDE, ADV.) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 & 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO SUMMON, PROSECUTE AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED-PERSONS FOR THEIR DELIBERATE AND WILLFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED 05.05.17 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS COURT IN W.P.NO.18362/17 VIDE ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:17151-DB CCC No. 1577 of 2017 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) The learned counsel appearing for the complainant submits that he is no longer appearing in the matter. The same submission is made by the learned counsel appearing for the accused as well. 2. In the said circumstances, we notice that there is no appearance for the parties and the matter has been pending consideration since 2017. 3. In the above view of the matter, though charges have already been framed, since there is no appearance on either side, we do not think there is any purpose in continuing with this Contempt of Court case at this distance of time. In the above view of the matter, the Contempt of Court case is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE RAK, List No.: 3 Sl No.: 4