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

State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|11 December, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4277 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
1. Jogish Aged about 46 years S/o late Sri. Sidde Gowda Sri. Mangalesh Rice Mill Owner Chennegowdanadoddi Village Maddur Taluk, Mandya District 2. Krishnegowda K.M. Aged about 54 years S/o Late Sri. Motegowda Nanjamma Rice Mill Owner T. Ballakere Village Maddur Taluk, Mandya District 3. Sunil Aged about 30 years S/o Sri. Thimme Gowda Chinnegowda Rice Mill Owner Maraliga Village, Koppa Hobli Maddur Taluk, Mandya District 4. Indushekar C.S. Aged about 33 years S/o Sri Somegowda Someshwara Rice Mill Owner Kalalingannadoddi Village Koppa Hobli, Maddur Taluk Mandya District 5. Naziulla Shariff Aged about 46 years S/o Late Sri. Shadiq Shariff M MSS Rice Mill Owner Maszid Road, Besagarahalli Village Maddur Taluk, Mandya District 6. K. H. Suresh Babu Aged about 48 years S/o K. Shivalingaiah Sri Rama Rice Mill Owner No.2276, 2nd Cross Konasale Village, Mandya Taluk Mandya District 7. G. S. Mahendra Aged about 65 years S/o Late Sri. Srikanthaiah Sri. Veerabhadreshwara Rice Mill Owner Gejjalegere Village, Maddur Taluk Mandya District 8. Syed Akram Pasha Aged about 45 years S/o Late Sri. Syed Abdul Jaffar JBR Rice Mill Owner Muslim Block, Maddur Town Maddur Taluk, Mandya District ... Petitioners (By Sri Satyanarayana S. Chalke, Adv.,) AND:
1. State of Karnataka By the Station House Officer K. M. Doddi Police Station K. M. Doddi Circle, Maddur Taluk Mandya District – 571 401 2. Panchegowda M L District Manager Karnataka Food & Civil Supplies Mandya – 571 401 ... Respondents (By Sri S. T. Naik – HCGP.,) This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the order dated 20.05.2016 taking cognizance in C.C.No.672/2016 registering a criminal case and issuing process for the appearance of the petitioner and quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.672/2016.
This Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the court made the following:
O R D E R On account of non-compliance of office objections within the time allowed, matter has been listed before Court on more than three occasions and even on cost being imposed, same has not been paid. Even today, there is no representation on behalf of petitioners. Office objections have not been complied with till date, which would indicate that petitioners are not interested in prosecuting this petition. Hence, petition stands dismissed for default.
SD/- JUDGE cp*
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

State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
11 December, 2019
Judges
  • Aravind Kumar