Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 23777 (KAR)

PURUSHOTTAM v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/3562/2019 · 2026-06-17

Ravi V Hosmani

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29632 CRL.P No. 3562 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3562 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. PURUSHOTTAM S/O APPANNA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, 2. APPANNA S/O ANNAYYAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, 3. DEVARAJ S/O LATE RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 4. SRINIVAS S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 5. HARISH S/O NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO. 69 KONADASDAPURA VILLAGE VIRGONAGAR POST, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK BANGALORE DIST. - 560 049. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHANKARAPPA, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29632 CRL.P No. 3562 of 2019 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY AVALAHALLI POLICE REP. BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT HIGH COURT BULDING BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. K. SATISH S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGE ABOUT 39 YEARS, KONADASAPURA BIDARAHALLI HOBLI VIRGONAGAR POST BANGALORE - 560 049. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SOUMYA R, HCGP FOR R1; SRI N. NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME NO.109/2019 PENDING BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER On noting absence on behalf of petitioners on earlier occasion, matter was adjourned cautioning against continued absence. On previous date, learned counsel for petitioners prayed for time which was granted on cost of Rs.5,000/-. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29632 CRL.P No. 3562 of 2019 2. A memo for retirement is filed today along with acknowledgement of petitioners no.1 and 2 dated 02.08.2024. Counsel submits no instructions whether no objection was sought by all petitioners. In any case, petitioners have not made alternative arrangement nor paid cost. 3. This would amount to lack of diligence. Hence, Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4