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

Sri Raghavendra vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|27 May, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27th DAY OF MAY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.5696 OF 2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
Sri.Raghavendra, S/o.Sri.H.K.Raju, Aged about 32 years, R/at No.89, 3rd Cross, Raghavendra Nagara, Mysuru-570 029. … Petitioner (By Sri.S.Venkateshwaran, Advocate) AND:
1. The State of Karnataka, Rep. by Secretary, Department of Law, Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru-560 001.
2. Nelamangala Town PS, Nelamangala Town, Bengaluru Rural District-562 123.
3. Smt.P.V.Madhushree, D/o.M.P.Venkatesh, W/o Dr.Raghavendra Purushotham, Aged about 30 years, R/at Subhash Nagar, Nelamangala Town, Bengaluru Rural District-562 123. … Respondents (By Sri.Vijaya Kumar Majage, Additional SPP for R1) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the JMFC Nelamangala to pass the final order in CC No.241/2011 in Crime No.648/2010 on the file of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala in a time bound manner of (3) three months, as per Annexure-E.
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri.S.Venkateshwaran, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.Vijaya Kumar Majage, learned Additional S.P.P for respondent No.1.
2. Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, there is no necessity to await service of notice on Respondents 2 and 3.
3. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner seeks a direction to the Trial Court to conclude the proceeding pending before it, viz., C.C.No.241/2011 in a time- bound manner.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the proceedings were initiated against him under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act in the year 2011. However, despite a lapse of more than seven years, till today, no effective steps have been taken by the Family Court to conclude the proceedings.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions and taking into account the fact that the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act were initiated against the petitioner in the year 2011, I deem it appropriate to direct the concerned Family Court to conclude the proceedings expeditiously not later than six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Sd/- JUDGE BNV AAJ: W.P.No.5696/2018 21.08.2019 ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of typographical error in the order dated 27.05.2019 passed by this Court in W.P.No.5696/2018, a direction has been issued to the ‘concerned Family Court to conclude the proceedings’ instead of ‘Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala to conclude the proceedings in C.C.No.241/2011.’ In view of the aforesaid submission, it is directed that in the order dated 27.05.2019 passed in W.P.No.5696/2018, at page No.3, paragraph No.5 in 5th line the words ‘concerned Family Court to conclude the proceedings’ be read as ‘Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala to conclude the proceedings in C.C.No.241/2011.’ This order shall be read in conjunction with the order passed in W.P.No.5696/2018 dated 27.05.2019.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-
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 Raghavendra vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
27 May, 2019
Judges
  • Alok Aradhe