Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 21625 (KAR)

SRI. E.M CHENTHAMARA v. SMT. BANU PRIYA S

WP/15858/2022 · 2026-06-10

Ravi V Hosmani

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27930 WP No. 15858 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. 15858 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. E.M CHENTHAMARA S/O MANICKAN AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT 17/6L, VINITHA NIVAS, MUNICIPAL COLONY, MANINAGAR METTUPALYAM, TAMIL NADU - 641 305. 2. SMT. C. BHAGYAVATHI W/O SRI. E.M. CHENTHAMARA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT 17/6L, VINITHA NIVAS MUNICIPAL COLONY, MANINAGAR, METTUPALYAM, TAMIL NADU - 641 305. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. A. MAHESH CHOWDHARY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. BANU PRIYA S D/O N. SAHADEVAN AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT NO.188/88A, NANDHANAM NIVAS, VHBCS LAYOUT, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM, Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27930 WP No. 15858 of 2022 BANGALORE - 560 086. 2. SRI. BIPIN C S/O SRI. E.M. CHENTHAMARA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT NO.297, SYNLAVNDER, 1ST MAIN, LAKESIDE ROAD, BEHIND BIG BASKET WAREHOUSE, ANJAPPA LAYOUT, B NARAYANAPURA MAHADEVAPURA, BENGALURU - 560 016. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 - SERVED) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO-QUASH THE PETITION OF CRL. MISC 97/2022 AND THE PROCEEDINGS FILED UNDER SECTION 12(1) OF THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005 BEFORE THE HONBLE ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE TRAFFIC COURT III, BANGALORE VIDE ANNX-A AND A1 AS BEING ERRONEOUS, ILLEGAL AND BAD IN THE EYES OF LAW AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27930 WP No. 15858 of 2022 ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for petitioners has filed a Memo stating that petitioners intend to withdraw petition as present petition has become infructuous. 2. Taking Memo on record, Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 58