Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 21028 (KAR)

ESHWARAPPA B v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/24877/2022 · 2026-06-10

Ravi V Hosmani

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28067 WP No. 24877 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 24877 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: ESHWARAPPA B., S/O LATE BYRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.2/10, BASAPPA ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027. …PETITIONER (BY SRI NITHIN GOWDA K.B., ADVOCATE FOR SRI PRASANNA KUMAR P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KEMPEGOWDANAGAR PS VIVESHWARAPURAM SUB DIVISION BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING DR BR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. PRADEEP K., S/O GANESH BHAT AGED 45 YEARS R/A NO.15, 7TH MAIN, 4TH CROSS NAVODAYA NAGARA, JP NAGAR, 7TH PHASE BENGALURU - 560 076. Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28067 WP No. 24877 of 2022 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M.R.PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI B.G.VASANTH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE SECOND FIR IN CRIME NO.158/2022 DTD 21.10.2022 REGISTERED BY THE R-1 FOR THE ALLEGED COMMISSION OF OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SEC.120B, 420, 417, 406, 506 IPC AND SEC.22 OF THE BANNING OF UNREGULATED DEPOSIT SCHEME ORDINANCE, 2019 AND SEC.9 OF THE KARNATAKA PROTECTION OF INTEREST OF DEPOSITORS IN FINANCIAL ESTABLISHMENT ACT, 2004 AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 VIDE ANNX-E, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE (CCH-1), CITY COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU CITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ON B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28067 WP No. 24877 of 2022 ORAL ORDER Learned HCGP for respondent no.1 submits that petition was filed challenging only complain. There was no interim order. Meanwhile, charge sheet is filed rendering above petition infructuous. 2. Noting above submission, petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE YKL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 68