Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sri Prathivindhya vs State By Thilak

High Court Of Karnataka|08 April, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6547 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
SRI. PRATHIVINDHYA S/O. LATE K.V. MOHAN PRASAD AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT NO.40, A1 CROSS, VINAYAKANAGAR TUMKUR ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAYEEM PASHA, ADV. - ABSENT) AND:
1 STATE BY THILAK PARK POLICE STATION TUMKUR DISTRICT REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE – 560 001 2 THE STATE BANK OF MYSORE SADASHIVANAGAR BRANCH [40686] KUNIGAL ROAD SADASHIVANAGAR TUMKUR – 572 102 REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER MR. K. KRISHNAMURTHY … RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.PC TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO.6489/2014 PENDING BEFORE THE HON’BLE 3RD ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE [J.D.] AND J.M.F.C., AT TUMKUR, AGAINST THE PETITIONER BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Though sufficient time was granted to comply with office objections, it had not been complied. Hence, matter had been listed for orders on several occasions. Even peremptory orders passed directing petitioner to comply with office objections subject to payment of cost is also not complied. In fact, on the last date of hearing, none appeared. Even today, there is no representation. It would only indicate that petitioner is not interested in prosecuting this petition.
Hence, petition stands dismissed for default and non prosecution.
Sd/- JUDGE AN/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri Prathivindhya vs State By Thilak

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
08 April, 2019
Judges
  • Aravind Kumar