Dismissed

Sri. Rajashekharappa Datanal S/O Kariyappa v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC9 Feb 2021CRL.P/102003/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a special criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner accused sought quashing of the JMFC order taking cognizance of an offence. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding such orders are revisable under Section 397 Cr.P.C. before the Sessions Court.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with liberty to file revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C. if so advised.

Sri. Rajashekharappa Datanal S/O Kariyappa… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 09^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT

¶5

CRL.P. NO.102003 OF 2015

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. RAJASHEKHARAPPA DATANAL S/O KARIYAPPA AGE:74 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE

¶8

SRI. BASAVARAJ DATANAL S/O KARIYAPPA AGE:70 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE

¶9

SRI. SHIVANAND DATANAL S/O BASAVARAJ AGE:42 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,

¶10

ALL ABOVE ARE R/O AT POST LINGADAL TQ & DIST:GADAG.

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI.D.M. MANJUNATH, ADV.) (ABSENT) (PETITION DISMISSED IN R/O PETITIONER NO.1 V/O/D 5.11.2016)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶15

REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH AT DHARWAD.

¶16

SULOCHANAPPA PURAD S/O YALLAPPA AGE:70 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/O AT POST LINGADAL, TQ & DIST:GADAG.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.PRAVEEN K UPPAR, HCGP FOR R1) (R2-SERVED)

¶18

¶19

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN GADAG RURAL POLICE STATION CRIME NO.153/2011 AS PER ANNEXURE-C PENDING BEFORE THE HON’BLE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) & II JMFC COURT AT GADAG BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶20

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The private complaint filed by respondent No.2 herein was referred to the police for investigation and report by the learned II-JMFC, Gadag. The police after investigation filed B report. Respondent No.2 filed protest petition. On consideration of the same, the learned JMFC has taken cognizance for offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and issued process to accused Nos.1 to 3.

¶23

This petition is filed by accused Nos.1 to 3 praying for quashing of order taking cognizance of offences against them. The order of this nature is revisable under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. before the learned jurisdictional Sessions Court as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in

¶24

¶25

(2013) 15 SCC 624 – Urmila Devi vs. Yudhvir Singh . In that view of the matter, it is not necessary for this Court to entertain this petition. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed with liberty reserved to the petitioners to file petition under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. seeking revision before the learned Sessions Judge, if so advised. All contentions are left open.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

JTR

Sri. Rajashekharappa Datanal S/O Kariyappa v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Rajashekharappa Datanal S/O Kariyappa v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.Pampanna S/O Late Timmanna Vs State of Karnataka

Soorykanth S/O Narayansa Habib Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Prakash Basappa Hosagouder Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Basavraj S/O Chanabasappa Hombali Vs State of Karnataka

Basappa Gulappa Ramdurg Vs the State of Karnataka

H.M. Manjunath S/O Gangadharayya Vs the State of Karnataka