SHIVANNA N E v. STATE BY KUSHAL NAGAR POLICE, KODAGU
CRL.P/8620/2024 · 2026-09-15
Rajesh Rai K
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 40214 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 40214 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010462232024 NC: 2026:KHC:50223 CRL.P No. 8620 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8620 OF 2024 BETWEEN:
1.
SHIVANNA N.E S/O EERAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
2. PARVATHAMMA W/O N.E SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
3.
N.S SHASHIKALA D/O SHIVANNA N.E AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
4.
N.S VEENA D/O SHIVANNA N.E AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
5.
N.S REKHA D/O SHIVANNA N.E AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
6.
N.S DURGESH D/O N.E SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
PETITIONER NO.1 TO 6 ARE R/AT SHIRANGALA GATE KUSHALNAGAR HOBLI, SOMWARPETE TALUK,
Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010462232024 NC: 2026:KHC:50223 CRL.P No. 8620 of 2024
KODAGU DISTRICT …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. JAGADEESH C.M, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE BY KUSHAL NAGAR POLICE, KODAGU REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 009
2.
RANGARAJU V.S S/O SRINIVASA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS SHIRANGALA GATE KUSHALNAGAR HOBLI, SOMWARPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571 234 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JAVEED S, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR FILED BY THE KUSHAL NAGAR POLICE AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 406,417,420 R/W 34 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND J.M.F.C AT KUSHALNAGAR.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
ORAL ORDER
There is no representation for the petitioners even on the second call.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010462232024 NC: 2026:KHC:50223 CRL.P No. 8620 of 2024
2. Though this matter is posted for tenth time for compliance of office objections, there is no compliance of the same. It seems that the petitioners are not interested in prosecuting the petition. Hence, left with no other option, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Registry to communicate this order to the concerned Trial Court.
3. If an application is filed to recall this order, the same would be considered subject to payment of costs of Rs.15,000/-.
SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE
HKV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 6