S MUSTAQ S/O. LATE ABDUL RASOOL v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
CRL.P/104030/2025 · 2026-02-16
V Srishananda
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5514 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5514 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2337 CRL.P No. 104030 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 104030 OF 2025 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN:
1.
S. MUSTAQ S/O. LATE ABDUL RASOOL, AGE. 49 YEARS, OCC. REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O. WARD NO.9, NEAR WATER TANK, POLICE LINE MILLARPET, BALLARI-583201.
2.
DADAPEER S/O. AZMEER SAB AGE. 42 YEARS, OCC. OWNER OF TATA ACE R/O. WARD NO.17, NEAR HAMPI VIDYALAYA, 3RD CROSS, HANUMAN NAGAR, BALLARI-583201. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B. ANWAR BASHA, ADVOCATE)-ABSENT
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH BRUCEPETE POLICE STATION,N BALLARI R/BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD-580001.
2.
VALLAMSHETTY SHRI CHAKRI RAYAL BABU S/O.V. C. VENUGOPAL AGE. 48 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. DOOR NO.1/1940, GANDHI NAGAR, YEMMIGANURU TOWN, ADHONO TALUK, KURNOOL DIST. ANDRAPRADESH-518301. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. M.AMAREGOUDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SE. 482 OF CR.P.C. (U/S.
528 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO QUASH THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE
CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Date: 2026.02.17 16:59:22 +0530
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2337 CRL.P No. 104030 of 2025
BRUCEPETE POLICE 12.09.2025, COMPLAINT, FIR IN CRIME NO.161/2024 BY BRUCEPETE POLICE BALLARI PENDING BEFORE IST ADDL CIVIL JUDGE (JN DN) AND JMFC BALLARI. PURSUANT THERETO IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S.
419, 465, 468, 471, 420, 34 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)
None present on behalf of petitioner. Even on the last date of hearing, there was no representation.
2. Petitioner has challenged the notice issued by the police to furnish the statement as a witness. Same cannot be the subject matter of quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as there is no order at all.
3. Therefore, petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE
CLK Ct-cmu LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 52