Dismissed

B S Nagaraj v. Deputy Superintendent of Police

Karnataka HC8 Jun 2021WP/54341/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking quashing of a complaint section under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court noted the underlying complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution, rendering the present petition devoid of merit, and disposed of the matter accordingly.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed as the impugned complaint was already dismissed for non-prosecution.

B S Nagaraj Vs Deputy Superintendent of Police — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.No.54341/2017

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JUNE 2021

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

¶7

WRIT PETITION No.54341/2017 (GM-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN :

¶9

B.S.NAGARAJ S/O LATE B.S.SHIVARAM RAO AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS OCC: REVENUE INSPECTOR THE OFFICER OF THE TAHASILDAR SRINGERI R/AT SRINGERI, KASABA HOBLI SRINGERI – 577 139 CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT

¶10

T.S.SHARATH KUMAR S/O SHIVASHANKAR T C AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS OCC:CLERK IN THE OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AT CHIKKAMAGALURU R/AT M.K. STREET SRINGERI – 577 139 CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT

¶11

K.RAGHAVENDRA SWAMY S/O K.KANUMAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS OCC: TALUK SURVEYOR IN THE OFFICE OF THE TAHASILDAR SRINGERI R/AT SHARADHA NAGAR TALUK OFFICER SRINGERI SRINGERI – 577 139 CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT

¶12

MADHUSUDHAN S/O LAXMIKANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS OCC:VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT IN THE OFFICE OF THE

¶13

W.P.No.54341/2017

¶14

¶15

TAHASILDAR SRINGERI R/AT VIDYARAYANAPURA CIRCLE SRINGERI – 577 139 CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT

¶16

B.G.NAGESH S/O B.S.GOPAL AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS OCC: SECOND DIVISION CLERK IN THE OFFICE OF THE TAHASILDAR SRINGERI, R/AT BELAGOLA KOPPA TALUK, KOPPA – 577 126 CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT

¶17

SOMAIAH S/O HUCHAIAH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS OCC: TALUK SURVEYOR IN THE OFFICE OF THE TAHASILDAR SRINGERI R/AT SRINGERI TALUK SRINGERI – 577 139 CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT …PETITIONERS

¶18

(BY SRI RAVINDRA B DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE)

¶19

AND :

¶20

DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU CHIKKAMAGALURU CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT – 577 101

¶21

K.B.SHANKARAPPA S/O BELLAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/O KANUVALLI MASIGE VILLAGE AND POST, SRINGERI TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT – 577 139 …RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI JEEVAN J.NEERALGI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 SERVED)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 04.10.2017 (ANNEXURE–E) PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL

¶24

W.P.No.54341/2017

¶25

¶26

DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU IN PCR NO.4/2016 ETC.

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

Sri Jeevan J.Neeralgi, learned Standing Counsel

¶30

accepts notice for respondent No.1. Registry to show his name in the cause list for respondent No.1.

¶31

Learned Counsel for the petitioners has

¶32

submitted memo for withdrawal of the petition along with copy of the order sheet in P.C.R.No.4/2016.

¶33

The copy of the said order sheet shows that the impugned complaint was dismissed for nonprosecution. Therefore this petition does not survive for further consideration and disposed of accordingly.

¶34

KSR

B S Nagaraj v. Deputy Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B S Nagaraj v. Deputy Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr Veera Bhushan R Goni Vs the State of Karnataka

Ganapathi Bhat a Vs the State of Karnataka

Mrs S Girija Shivaram Vs the State of Karnataka by

Sri Praveen Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Hitesh Shamji Gala Vs Mrs Bhavna Hitesh Gala

Mohan Kumar N Vs State of Karnataka by