Karnataka Court December 2010 Judgments
Smt.Fareeda, and ors. Vs. the State by Cubbon Park Police Station.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-23-2010
1. Heard the counsel for the petitioners.2. Complaint was registered against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 418, 420, 465, 466, 468 and 177 of the Indian Penal Code in Crime Ho.301/2010 on the file of the Cubbon Park Police Station.3. It is alleged that the Assistant General manager of the Vijaya Bonk had lodged a report that, the petitioners had approached the complainant on 23.01.2006 and had availed of a Housing Loan of Rs 16,60,000/- from the complainant in order to purchase certain property. It is further alleged that, the property was purchased in the name of petitioner No.1 and the said property was mortgaged with the complainant by executing a memorandum of deposit of original Title Deeds. However, it is further alleged that the petitioners became defaulters in re-payment of the amount. Inspite of sufficient time having teen granted, the petitioners delimited in repayment, It was alleged that the petitioners had thereafter manipulated and create...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhukumara S/O B PapannA. Vs. State by Kanakpura Police Station.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-23-2010
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was the Asst.Sub Inspector of Kanakapura police station had lodged a complaint against certain accused persons that when he was working ac Asst. Sub Inspector of the said police station on 04.05.2003 there was meeting held by several people a- Kanakapura Taluka Panchayath office and the petitioner was deputed to maintain 'bundobasth' and at about 11.30 a.m., there were certain groups of people who tried to take out a procession from the Taluka Panchayath office and at that time, some people obstructed the procession and there was commotion. In the commotion, certain police officials had been injured and damage were caused to public property. In this regard, a complaint had been lodged against the accused for offences punishable under Sections 143. 147, 148, 341, 427. 353, 332 read with Section 149 of IPC in Cr.No. 132/03 before the jurisdictional police station. However, the case has been pendin...
Tag this Judgment!Basavaraj, S/O.Ummanagouda 50 Years. Vs. the State of Karnataka by Sub ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-23-2010
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The facts are as follows:-It is stated that on 11.8.2010, the complainant along with his brother and other labourers were at their field watering the same. Later it was found that accused No.1 had obstructed water flow to their field and diverted the same into his field. The complainant and his brother therefore sought to remove the obstruction placed by accused No.1 at which point of time, the accused wedding deadly weapons attacked the complainant and his brother and abused them in foul language while referring to their caste, in a derogatory fashion; Accused No.1 is said to have assaulted the complainant with club while accused No.2 had assaulted with iron road and thereby caused injuries and hence, the complaint was lodged before the Kurugodu Police Station in Crime No. 133/10 for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 504, 504(2) read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(l)(ix) and (x) of Scheduled ...
Tag this Judgment!Amar Chavan, and anr. Vs. the State of KamatakA.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-23-2010
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners.2. The facts are that on the basis of a complaint lodged by one Santhosh Kumar. Gulbarga. To the effect that when he was travelling on his motor cycle on 13.11.10. the petitioners and others had stopped his motor cycle and had taken him in a four wheeler and along with two others assaulted him with iron rod, as a result of which, he suffered injuries on various parts of his body and on the basis of the complaint lodged by him, a case has been registered against the petitioners and others. Petitioners having approached the Court of III Addl.Sessions Judge, Gulbarga, an application for anticipatory bail has been rejected on the ground that the petitioners' names in the F.I.R and overt acts attributed against the petitioners of having injured the complainant with iron rod and causing other grievous injuries and they were required for investigation by the Investigating officer and in order to recover any incriminating materials and further, ...
Tag this Judgment!V S Utham S/O Goindaraju Aged 24 Years. and ors. Vs. State of Karnatak ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-23-2010
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-The petitioners contend that the first petitioner is the son of the second and third petitioner who are agriculturists and own immovable property at Seggahossur village. The third petitioner is working as a Principal of Junior college. Hebbale since two decades and is permanent resident alongwlth her husband of the aforesaid village. The petitioners are all educated. It was alleged, one Slid T.N. Chandra S/o. Madava, resident of Kudige village. Kushalanagar. Somawarpet Taluk. Kodagu District, father of the deceased Sharath had lodged a criminal complaint before Kushalanagar police station that his son has been shot dead by the accused Shibu. Shali. Shiji and Bharath on 28.09.2009 at about 11.30 p.m. It was alleged that the accused had arrived at the scene of offence when the son of the complainant was in a shop at Kudige. The said accused had arrived in Maruthi van and they had shot the son o...
Tag this Judgment!M. Anwarjee, S/O Late Mohidden Sharief. Vs.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-23-2010
1. Learned Counsel for the appellant seeks leave to withdraw the appeal and present the same before the Court having jurisdiction.2. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of as withdrawn.3. The Registry to return the certified copy and the other papers sought for by the Learned Counsel for the appellant, including refund of Court fee....
Tag this Judgment!C. S. Sheshachala S/O Late Subba Jois. Vs. M. Madappa Aged About. 47 Y ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-16-2010
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a Memo dated 16.12.2010, which reads as under:"The above matter may kindly be dismissed with liberty to file appeal. In the mean time, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the impugned order and the petitioner submits that he will file appeal within 2 weeks & hence, this Memo."2. In view of Memo dated 16.12.2010, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the impugned order dated 19.6.2010 passed in C.C.No.1914/2007 by the Principal First Civil Judge (JR.DN.) & JMFC, Mysore, is stayed for a period of two weeks, to enable the petitioner to prefer an Appeal.3. Misc.Crl.5321/2010 filed for stay is dismissed since it does not survive for consideration....
Tag this Judgment!B S Prahalad and anr.M/S Bhargavi Industries. Vs. the State of Karnata ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-15-2010
1. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has filed a memo dated 15.12.2010 seeking permission to withdraw the Criminal Petition.2. The memo is taken on record and the memo reads as follows:"The petitioners submit as under:The above Criminal Petition was filed before this Hon'ble Court 12.05.2010 seeking quashing of the entire proceedings in C.C. No.18/2003 on the file of JMFC, Challakere on legal grounds. This Hon'ble Court by its order dated 04.06.2010 issued notice to the respondents and an interim order of stay was granted on the same day. As the Government has decided to withdraw the C.C. No. 18/2003 pending before JMFC, Challakere as per Sec.321 of Cr.P.C, the petitions herein seek leave of this Hon'ble Court to withdraw the above petition for the disposal before the Trial Court. The petitioners have produced herewith copies of the decisions of the State Government in the said regard. Therefore, the above petition may pleased be dismissed as withdrawn to enable the State authority t...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. City Finance Corporation (Regd.) Vs. Dinakara Shetly
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-15-2010
1. This appeal is by the complainant challenging the order of JMFC, Kundapura in CC.No.3101/2002 dated 11.02.2008 in acquitting the accused and dismissing the complaint.2. According to the complainant, it is a Finance Corporation represented by its partner and the accused had borrowed a sum of Rs.80, 000/- on 16.10.2000 promising to repay the same with interest, but failed to do so and, as on 19.09.2002. The accused was due in a sum of Rs. 1, 20.000/- to die complainant-firm and on demand, had issued a cheque drawn on Canara Bank. Beejadi branch for Rs. 1, 20.000/ which. On presentation for encashment, came to be dishonoured for insufficient funds. Accordingly, after causing legal notice, the complaint was filed for non-payment. The trial Court, after enquiry, has dismissed the complaint, against which, the complainant is before this Court.3. Heard.4.The trial Court, having noted that the accused had borrowed a sum of Rs.80,000/- as on 16.10.2000 and at the time of lending the amount, ...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Rama @ Ramegowda 30 Yrs, Vs. State of KarnatakA.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Dec-15-2010
1. Appeal is by the accused challenging the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Past Track Court I. Mandya in SC 8/2007 convicting the accused for the offences under S.448. 504 and 326, IPC and sentencing to undergo simple imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.5.000/- and default sentence of five months for the offence under S.326. IPC and, for the offences under S.448 and 504, IPC sentenced the accused to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- for each of the offence and default sentence of one month simple imprisonment. 2. According to the prosecution, the complainant Rangappa is residing at Mallcnahalli village doing coolie work. On 18.9.2005, while he was sleeping after taking food, around 11.30 p.m. somebody called him. And when he came out. The accused along with one Rajanna a resident of Bindiganavile village had come. When he inquired, the accused told that he had to come for coolie work on Tuesday and the complainant informed him that he would inform about coming to wor...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »