Dismissed¶26

Mr Amogha S Jagathap v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Jan 2025CRL.A/1017/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail appeal dismissed for non-prosecution: Karnataka HC Bengaluru, CRL.A 1017/2022, decided 06-01-2025, single judge Justice V Srishananda. Appellants (accused Nos. 4 and 5) Amogha S Jagathap and V. Samboji Rao sought bail under s.14(A)(2) SC/ST (POA) Act, 2015 in Cr.No.32/2022 Kirugavalu P.S. (ss. 143, 448, 427, 323, 324, 354, 506, 504 r/w 149 IPC; s.3(1)(r)(s) SC/ST (POA) Act), challenging order dated 12.05.2022 in C.Misc.No.361/2022 of V Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Mandya. Counsel Sri Gopi K.J. absent in second round of calling; process fee unpaid for notice to respondent No.2 Smt. Lakshmi; State represented by HCGP Sri Channappa Erappa. Dismissed for non prosecution — no merits decided, minimal citational value.

What did the court decide?

None appeared on behalf of the appellants even in the second round of calling of the cases.

Mr Amogha S Jagathap Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:178 CRL.A No. 1017 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1017 OF 2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. AMOGHA S JAGATHAP, S/O V. SAMBOJI RAO, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS.

¶9

MR. V. SAMBOJI RAO S/O VINKATOJI, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

¶10

BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF MARKALU VILLAGE, KIRUGAVALU HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 430.

¶11

PERMANENTLY R/AT NO.11, DEODATE PUBLIC SCHOOL ROAD, VITTALA NAGARA, ISRO LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 078

¶12

…APPELLANTS

¶13

(BY SRI. GOPI K.J., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

¶14

Digitally signed by MALATESH K C

¶15

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

AND:

¶17

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KIRUGAVALU POLICE, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURTS COMPLEX, BANGALORE 560 001.

¶18

SMT. LAKSHMI W/O NATARAJU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT MURKALU VILLAGE, KIRUGAVALU HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT 571 430

¶19

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP FOR R1/STATE)

¶20

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:178 CRL.A No. 1017 of 2022

¶22

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.14(A) (2) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT, 2015 PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE V ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANDYA IN C.MISC.NO.361/2022 DATED 12.05.2022 AND ORDER TO RELEASE THE APPELLANTACCUSED NO.4 AND 5 ON BAIL IN CR.NO.32/2022 KIRUGAVALU P.S FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 143,448,427,323,324,354,506, 504 R/W 149 OF IPC AND SEC.3(1)(r)(s) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANDYA.

¶23

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Even in the second round of calling of the cases, none present on behalf of the appellants.

¶26

Process fee itself is not paid for issue of notice to respondent No.2. Therefore, appeal is dismissed for non prosecution.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

(V SRISHANANDA)