In this non-substantive criminal revision petition wherein the prosecution failed to submit office objections despite repeated adjournments, the High Court dismissed the petition on the grounds of non-compliance of procedural requirements imposed upon the prosecution.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:12621 CRL.RP No. 100148 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100148 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE TOWN POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR, DANDELI POLICE STATION, DISTRICT UTTARA KANNADA, THROUGH THE ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP)
AND:
APYA @ BASAVARAJ SHIVANAND SARAVANDAKAR,
…RESPONDENT
Digitally
signed by
V N
V N BADIGER
BADIGER Date:
2023.10.31
14:40:24
+0530
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.33/2014 DATED 04/01/2020 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, U.K. KARWAR, SITTING AT SIRSI, AND IN CC NO.109/2010 DATED 21/09/2013 AND SET ASIDE BOTH THE JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS PASSED BY THE APPELLANT COURT AND JMFC COURT, DANDELI AND TO CONVICT THE RESPONDENT/ ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 324, 323, 326, 504, 506 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
NC: 2023:KHC-D:12621 CRL.RP No. 100148 of 2020
ORDER
On 26.03.2021, at the request of learned HCGP
appearing for the revision petitioner/State, four weeks time was granted to comply with the office objections. Again on 25.01.2023, 13.03.2023, 7.06.2023 at the
request of learned HCGP appearing for the revision petitioner/State, time was granted to comply with the office objections. Despite granting sufficient opportunity, the office objections have not complied. Hence, the petition is dismissed for non-compliance of office objections.
Sd/JUDGE
VB
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5
2 provisions across 1 enactments
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
APYA @ BASAVARAJ SHIVANAND SARAVANDAKAR
SRACHAIAH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
