Court : Karnataka
(Prayer: This Criminal Referred Case Is Registered As Required Under Section 366 Cr.P.C. For Confirmation Of Death Sentence Awarded To Accused No.10 Syed Mohammed Ibrahim S/O Late Mohammed Ismail By The Xxxiv Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Presiding Oficer, Spl. Court, Central Prison Premises, Bangalore By Judgment Of Conviction Dated 21/29-11-2008 In Sc No.696 Of 2005. This Criminal Appeal Is Filed Under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C By The Advocate For The Appellant Praying To Set Aside The Judgment And Order Of Convictions Dated 21.11.2008 And Sentences Dated 29.11.2008 Passed In S.C.No.696/2005, On The File Of 34th Addl. City Civil And Session Judge And P.O Spl.Court For The Trial Of Church Bomb Blast Cases, Central Prison Premises, Bangalore.) 1. A series of bomb blasts at Churches situate at various places rocked the State of Karnataka in the year 2000 attempting to disturb the normal tranquility of the civilized society and the peace loving people of Karnataka who believe in co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU Dated this the 17th day of December, 2014 PRESENT THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR AND THE HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL RC NO.3 OF2008c/w CRL.A NO.1203 OF2008& CRL.A. NO.24 OF2009CRIMINAL RC NO.3 OF2008BETWEEN:: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR GENERAL BANGALORE ...PETITIONER (By Sri H N NILOGAL, SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR) AND: SYED MOHAMMED IBRAHIM S/O LATE SYED MOHAMMED ISMAIL ...RESPONDENT2THIS CRIMINAL REFERRED CASE IS REGISTERED AS REQUIRED UNDER SECTION366CR.P.C. FOR CONFIRMATION OF DEATH SENTENCE AWARDED TO ACCUSED NO.10 SYED MOHAMMED IBRAHIM S/O LATE MOHAMMED ISMAIL BY THE XXXIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE & PRESIDING OFICER, SPL. COURT, CENTRAL PRISON PREMISES, BANGALORE BY JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION DATED2129-11-2008 IN SC NO.696 OF2005 CRL.A NO.1203 OF2008BETWEEN: SYED MOHAMMED IBRAHIM S/O LATE SYED MOHAMMED ISMAIL AGED ABOUT45YEARS ACCOUNTS MANAGER M.N.C., VARTHUR BANGALORE CITY (NOW IN JUDICIAL CUS...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
- :1. :- R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE23D DAY OF SEPTEMBER2014BEFORE THE HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA W.P.No.22801/2014 (S-RES) BETWEEN: Dr.SMT.MANGALA SHRIDHAR, AGED ABOUT40YRS, W/O.SHRIDHAR NARAYANIH, R/A.NO.1914, 18TH A MAIN, SHRI LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA NILAYA, 5TH CROSS, II STAGE, J.P.NAGAR, BANGALORE 560 078. .. PETITIONER (By Sri K.V.DHANANJAYA, ADV. & SRI I.S.PRAMOD CHANDRA, ADV.) AND: THE KARNATAKA GOVERNORS SECRETARIAT OFFICE, REP.BY ITS UNDER-SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNOR (ADMN.) RAJ BHAVAN, BANGALORE 560 001. (DELETED V.C.O. DT.7/7/2014) 1.THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560 001. 2.THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIDHANA SOUDHA POLICE STATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560 001. .. RESPONDENTS (BY PROF.RAVIVARMA KUMAR, ADVOCATE GENERAL & SRI A.S.PONNANNA, A.A.G., FOR SRI S.V.GIRI KUMAR, AGA FOR R-1 &2) - :2. :- THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES226& 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRA...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(Prayer: This Writ Petition Is Filed Under Articles 226 and 227 Of The Constitution Of India, Praying To Declare That The Suspension Order At Ann-B Dated 14/5/2014 Is Ultra Vires The Powers Conferred Under Article 317(2) Of The Constitution, Ab-Initio Void, Without The Decision Of Council Of Ministers, Premature And Violative Of Article 21 Of The Constitution Of India.) 1. Petitioner is a member of the Karnataka Public Service Commission (hereinafter, referred to as "the KPSC"), appointed under Article 316 of the Constitution. She has assailed her suspension, which is by order dated 14/05/2014. Petitioner was appointed as a member of KPSC on 24/11/2012. The impugned order of suspension has been passed by His Excellency, the Governor, State of Karnataka, in exercise of the powers conferred under clause (2) of Article 317 of the Constitution. The basis for the impugned order is, allegation of corruption against the petitioner in selection of Gazetted Probationers. 2. The State Government...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
(Prayer: This Criminal Petition Is Filed U/S 482 Of Cr.P.C Seeking To Quash The P.C.No. 142/2013 Now Numbered As C.C.N0.858/2013 Pending On The File Of The J Mfc Ii-Court, Hubli.) 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No. 1 - State and learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the records. 2. The petitioners herein have approached this Court for quashing of the proceedings in P.C. No. 142/2013, which was later registered as C.C. No.858/2013. The private complaint was filed against the petitioners for the offences punishable under. Sections 494, 109 and 114 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'I.P.C.' for brevity). 3. The learned counsel for petitioners strenuously contended that the private complaint filed by complainant Smt. Rajeshwari does not disclose any specific allegations against the petitioner Nos.2 to 4. The omni bus allegations have been made against petitioners with r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE3D DAY OF JUNE, 2014 PRESENT THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M SHANTANAGOUDAR THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE C R KUMARASWAMY AND CRIMINAL APPEAL No.358 OF2009BETWEEN: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HEBBAGODI POLICE APPELLANT (BY SRI .B.T.VENKATESH, SPP II) AND:1. R.H.KESHAVA S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT25YEARS R/O RAMASAGARA VILLAGE ANEKAL TALUK2 HANUMANTHAPPA S/O RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT55YEARS R/O RAMASAGARA VILLAGE ANEKAL TALUK3 GOVINDAPPA S/O B.RAMAIAH2AGED ABOUT55YEARS R/O RAMASAGARA VILLAGE ANEKAL TALUK (BY SRI .S.K.VENKATA REDDY, ADVOCATE) RESPONDENTS ******* THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION3781) & (3) CR.P.C. BY THE STATE P.P.FOR THE STATE PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL PASSED BY LEARNED PRL.JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE IN S.C.NO.255/2004 THEREBY ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENTS-ACCUSED OF THE OFFENCES P/U/S302R/W SEC.34 OF IPC. DATED:20.01....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal Is Filed Under Section 378(1) and (3) Cr.P.C. By The State P.P.For The State Praying That This Hon'ble Court May Be Pleased To Grant Leave To Appeal Against The Judgment And Order Of Acquittal Passed By Learned Prl.Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore In S.C.No.255/2004 Dated:20.01.2009, Thereby Acquitting The Respondents-Accused Of The Offences P/U/'S 302 R/W Sec.34 Of Ipc.) 1. This appeal is preferred by the State against the judgment and order dated 20.01.2009 passed by the Principal Sessions Court, Bangalore Rural, Bangalore. By the said judgement the trial Court acquitted accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 for the offences under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of I.P.C. However, Accused No.1 is convicted for the offences under Section 304-11 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,00,000/-. Since the accused No.1 has already served sentence and paid fine he is released from custody. Convicted accused No.1 has not filed...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(Prayer: This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the endorsement dated 7/9.1.2010 issued by the respondent no.3 University vide Annexure-A.) (Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash Annexure-E dated 1.6.2011 issued by the first respondent and also Annexure-F issued by the 4th respondent dated 13.06.2011 for the reasons stated at para 4 to this writ petition.) (Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash Annexure-F, i.e., endorsement dated 5.9.2011 issued by the first respondent i.e., Karnataka State Law University and etc;) (Prayer: This Writ Petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the Admission Notification dated 1.6.2011 marked as Annexure-B, in so far as explanation to Rule-2(c) is concerned, award costs, pass such other writ or direction.) (Prayer: This Writ Pet...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(Prayer: This Writ Appeal is filled under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act praying to set aside the Order passed in Writ Petition No.10744/2010 (L-K) dated 13.08.2010.) D.H. Waghela, C.J. Oral: 1. The appellant, a workman employed under the respondent -State Transport Corporation (KSRTC, Chickmagalur), has called into question the order dated 13.08.2010 in Writ Petition No.10744/2010 of learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby the petition of the appellant was partly allowed, so as to modify the award of the Industrial Tribunal, partly holding in favour of the appellant. 2. The interesting facts, in brief, of the case of the appellant are that he was employed as a Conductor under the respondent and after nearly 11 years of service, he was compulsorily retired on 07.03.2001 on the ground of surgical amputation of his leg due to which, he had remained absent from 03.04.2000 to 30.09.2000. According to the respondent, the appellant was admitted to hospital due to pain in his l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Gulbarga
Heard. By the impugned judgment the respondents herein were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 135 of Electricity Act, 2003 and are sentenced to pay fine of Rs.1,500/- each. Default sentence is also imposed. The State has filed this appeal praying for enhancement of sentence on the ground that inadequate sentence is imposed on the respondents. Case of the prosecution is that the complainant Manohar Rao Biradar who was the Assistant Executive Engineer at GESCOM, Vigilance, Bidar, on getting credible information of theft of electricity pertaining to the house of accused persons situated at Naubad went to the spot along with staff and police at about 4.00 PM on 05.01.2007. They inspected the installation of R.R.No.NBL 320, which stood in the name of accused No.1 and found that there is a direct hook from the LT line and consequently the electricity was being used unlawfully, though the meter was already removed. Thus it was prima facie clear that there was theft of electri...
Tag this Judgment!