Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5624 (KAR)

AMEERKHAN S/O. MAHABOOBSAB BHAGWAN v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/104953/2025 · 2026-02-12

V Srishananda

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2258 CRL.P No. 104953 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 104953 OF 2025 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: AMEERKHAN S/O. MAHABOOBSAB BHAGWAN AGE. 29 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER, R/O. M.K. HUBLI, TQ. KITTUR, DIST. BELAGAVI, PIN-591118. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.M. MUCHHANDI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE POLICE INSPECTOR KITTUR TALUK. KITTUR, DIST. BELAGAVI, PIN-591115 R/BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD BENCH, PIN-580011. 2. SHRI. KALLAPPA S/O. MAYAPPA KARIKATTI, (FATHER OF VICTIM), AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. KSRTC DRIVER, R/O. M. K. HUBLI, TQ. KITTUR, DIST. BELAGAVI, PIN-591118. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; NOTICE SERVED TO R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (U/S. 528 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO ALLOW THE PETITION OF THIS PETITIONER/ ACCUSED BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 05/11/2025 PASSED IN SPL.CASE.NO: 29/2021 BY ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-I BELAGAVI (KITTUR P.S.CR.NO. 46/2019 U/S 366(A), 376 OF IPC AND SECTION 4, 5(L) AND 6 OF POCSO ACT, PENDING TRIAL ON THE FILE OF ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE FTSC-I BELAGAVI AND FURTHER BE ALLOW THE CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Date: 2026.02.13 15:47:43 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2258 CRL.P No. 104953 of 2025 APPLICATION FILED BY THIS PETITIONER U/S. 311 OF CR.P.C., IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Case called out, none present on behalf of the petitioner. 2. Matter pertains to the charge under Section 4, 5(L) and 6 of the POCSO Act. 3. Petitioner has not chosen to address the argument. Even on the last date of hearing, there was no representation. As such, petition dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE CLK CT-CMU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 64