Dismissed

Spoorthy @ Spurthi v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Mar 2026CRL.P/16760/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an oral order in a criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC praying for quashing of proceedings. The court held that since charges were framed and evidence is on, submissions for interference at this stage are untenable and disposed the petition reserving liberty to urge contentions before the trial court.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of with liberty to urge contentions before the concerned Court at the appropriate time.

Spoorthy @ Spurthi Vs the State of Karnataka — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:12695 CRL.P No. 16760 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 16760 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS))

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SPOORTHY @ SPURTHI D/O RADHA KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O KONDAPANENI VILLAGE, NO.99, RELIANCE GREEN VILLAGE, MOKILA POST, HYDERABAD - 501 203.

¶11

Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

NIKHIL VINOD JOSE, S/O VINDO JOSE, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, LOBO COMPOUND, SANKESHA KOTTARA, MANGALORE - 575 006.

¶13

YASHWATH. P.J., S/O JAYANANDA .P., AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, NO.2/127/2(1), MUNDEVU HOUSE, MOODUPERARGRAMA, MANGALORE POST, GANJIMATTA, MANGALORE DISTRICT - 574 144.

¶14

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:12695 CRL.P No. 16760 of 2025

¶15

HC-KAR

¶16

PERALA UPENDRA RAO, S/O PERALA NARAYANA RAO, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT FLAT NO. 104, BLOCK 'A', SUN RISE RESIDENCY, MACHABOLARUM, TIRUMALAGIRI, BOLARAM, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA - 500 010.

¶17

MOH. IRSHAD, S/O MOHI. ISMAIL, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT NO.8, 4, 369/211/110, S.R.T. NAGAR, BORABANDA, VTC, HYDERABAD, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT - 500 018.

¶18

ELLURU VENKATA ABHILASH, S/O E.A. RAMANA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O FLOT NO.103, BLOCK-8, DIVYASREE SHAKTHI APARTMENTS, MIYAPUR, K.V. RANGAREDDY DISTRICT-500 049, TELANGANA STATE

¶19

…PETITIONERS

¶20

(BY SRI. A.N. RADHA KRISHNA, ADVOCATE)

¶21

AND:

¶22

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶23

¶24

NC: 2026:KHC:12695 CRL.P No. 16760 of 2025

¶25

HC-KAR

¶26

BY PUTTENAHALLI POLICE, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶27

SRI. DHARNESH, S/O C.S. NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O NO.70, C.I. II MAIN, DOLLARS COLONY, J.P. NAGAR IV PHASE, BENGALURU - 560 075.

¶28

…RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1)

¶30

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C (U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 04.02.2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED 44th ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU AND QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CC.NO.5809/2019, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED 30th ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISAHBLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 323, 341, 354, 354(B), 504, 149 OF IPC.

¶31

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

¶32

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶33

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:12695 CRL.P No. 16760 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶37

ORAL ORDER

¶38

Learned Addl. SPP on verification of the records would

¶39

submit that the charges have already been framed in the case at hand and the evidence is on, as it is C.C. of the year 2019.

¶40

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would

¶41

seek to project several instances that would entail interference at the hands of this Court, at this stage, all those submissions are untenable.

¶42

Therefore, the petitioners are at liberty to urge all

¶43

the contentions before the concerned Court at the appropriate time.

¶44

Reserving such liberty, the petition stands disposed.

¶45

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA)

¶46

JUDGE

¶47

SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40

Spoorthy @ Spurthi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Spoorthy @ Spurthi v. the State of Karnataka

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

Mrs. Mahawish Ismail Salih, Vs the State of Karnataka

Harishbabu, Vs State by Cen Police

M/S Inderjit Mehta Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Vs State of Karnataka

Dinesh Baliga Vs State of Karnataka

Ahmed Jilan Basha @ Ahmed Basha Vs State of Ashoknagar Police Station

Sri G. M Kumar Vs State of Karnataka