Disposed

Smt. Chandrika Tilak Raj v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC4 Nov 2024CRL.P/4214/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal petition filed under S. 482 Cr.PC to quash FIR and proceedings alleging offences under Ss. 420, 504, 506 IPC. Court directed amendment of prayer to seek expeditious disposal and imposed a six-month outer limit on concluding proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Direction to concerned court to endeavour to conclude proceedings within an outer limit of six months.

Smt. Chandrika Tilak Raj Vs State of Karnataka by — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:44050 CRL.P No. 4214 of 2023

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4214 OF 2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. CHANDRIKA TILAK RAJ, W/O TILAK RAJ, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/A NO.301, VANDANA ORCHID, 8TH PHASE, J.P. NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 078.

¶8

JAYANTH, S/O HEMARAJ, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT NO.19, 1ST MAIN, 4TH CROSS, GOURAVANAGARA, J.P. NAGAR 7TH PHASE, BANGALORE - 560 078.

¶9

…PETITIONERS

¶10

Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

(BY SMT. E.P. PANKAJAMANI, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHO, PUTTENAHALLI PS, BENGALURU - 560 078, REPRESENTED BY GOVT. PLEADER, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶14

MR. RAMAKRISHNAPPA H, S/O VENKATESHAPPA,

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:44050 CRL.P No. 4214 of 2023

¶17

AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.8, 14TH CROSS, PUTTENAHALLI, J.P. NAGAR 7TH PHASE, BANGALORE - 560 078.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP)

¶20

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED IN CR.NO.286/2021 PUTTENAHALLI P.S., AND ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE 30TH A.C.M.M, BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.31042/2022 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 420, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Heard Smt. E. Pankaja, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri. B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Additional SPP appearing for respondent No.1.

¶25

The subject petition calling in question proceedings in C.C.No.31042/2022. Though the prayer is made for quashment of the entire proceedings in C.C.No.31042/2022,

¶26

¶27

NC: 2024:KHC:44050 CRL.P No. 4214 of 2023

¶28

the learned counsel would restrict her prayer to a direction to the concerned Court for expeditious disposal of the case.

¶29

The issue in the lis relates to the year 2013. The incident comes to light in the year 2018. Crime is registered on 21.12.2021. Therefore, there is a gross delay in registering the crime. These factors shall also be borne in mind by the concerned Court, while concluding the proceedings. In the light, the concerned Court shall endeavour to conclude the proceedings within an outer limit of six months, if not earlier.

¶30

Ordered accordingly.

¶31

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA)

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

JY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6 CT: BHK

Smt. Chandrika Tilak Raj v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Chandrika Tilak Raj v. State of Karnataka by

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

A S Gangothri Vs the State of Karnataka by

Mr Rahul Chandrashekar Bhat Vs the State of Karnataka

Nasrulla Shariff Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr. Chowdappa Bhaskar. Vs Kullachanda Chinnappa Subbaiah

Sri. Devaraju S Vs State by Maddur P.S.

Mr Moosa Kaleemulla Khan Vs Mrs Nagma Nikath