Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24676 (KAR)

SRI RAJU K v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/6185/2026 · 2026-06-19

M Nagaprasanna

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30523 CRL.P No. 6185 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6185 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. SRI RAJU K S/O.KONDAIAH AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/AT NO.179, 1ST MAIN ROAD NEAR GOVT HOSPITAL DWARKANAGAR, CHIKKABANAVARA BANGALORE - 560 090. 2. SMT.MAHALAKSHMI W/O. RAJU K AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT NO.179, 1ST MAIN ROAD NEAR GOVT HOSPITAL DWARKANAGAR, CHIKKABANAVARA BANGALORE- 560 090. 3. BHANUPRIYA R D/O. RAJU K AGED 30 YEARS R/AT NO. 179, 1ST MAIN ROAD NEAR GOVT HOSPITAL DWARKANAGAR, CHIKKABANAVARA BANGALORE - 560 090. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B.V.M. ADEKAR, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30523 CRL.P No. 6185 of 2026 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY NORTH WOMEN POLICE STATION REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 001 2. SMT. ASWINI W/O. HARIKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT NO.76/1, VIJAYLAKSHMI LAYOUT ABBIGERE, BENGALURU - 560 090. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S. 482 OF (FILED U/S.528 BNSS) CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE SUMMONS/NOTICE ISSUED AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN C.C.NO.7293/2026 ORDER OF TRIAL COURT DATED 15.02.2026 AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.1 AND 5 FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/ 85, 351(2), 352, 3(5) OF BNS AND SECTIONS 3, 4 OF DP ACT IN C.C.NO.7293/2026 ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE IN THE COURT OF XXXII ADDL CMM, BENGALURU IN ORDER SHEET AT ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30523 CRL.P No. 6185 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the learned Magistrate while taking cognizance has not taken cognizance against these petitioners - accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 and has taken cognizance only qua the husband accused No.1. 2. In that light, the FIR itself would not survive against these petitioners. 3. Therefore, the petition stands disposed, reserving liberty to the petitioners to knock at the doors of this Court in the event of need. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9