High Court Karnataka High Court

Malleshappa vs State Of Karnataka on 30 June, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Malleshappa vs State Of Karnataka on 30 June, 2009
Author: Subhash B.Adi


IN THE HIGH OOURT OF KARICATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 30¢’ DAY OF JUNE. 2009

BEFORE

THE HOIWBLE MR.JUS’l’ICE SUBHASH 13.A:§i” ‘ ‘ *

CRIMINAL PETITION N()..f_364$l2_Ofi8″‘ > ‘
BETWEEN: V ‘ 4’ 1 M M

1 MALLESHAPPA
s/<3. MARIGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, _
R/A'I"'SL?MA NILAYN, '
:31' (312033, GANDH1rImARA_~;
NEHRU COLONY, _ -_
BELLARY.

2 SM’? saaxumamumia , _
W/O MALLEsHA1?»PA,. = 1 ‘ 1’ *

AGED A3o’uT4.6s.y.12ARs,._.__
R/AT “sum ::§r;’LAYAa» _

131* CR.(}SS;..QA2€;)HI£lAC«A;1§A,«.
NEHVRU COLONY E:E’LL_;u:g§(.

3 SMT’E}_Mf:.._ ‘ _
2:)/0. MALLESHAPPA; _
AGED ABOUT. 39 YEAR .r
R[r'{!’ALUR, ‘-

MDHRA PRABESH. _

V4 .A ‘ -Sm_is:m¢JxA~:12

9’m.’MA:.1;ESI!APPA,
” ._ KGED A’;;’7-3€)1VI’I’V”YEARS,
AADVOCATE BY PROFFESSION,
R«._[A’i’, BELGAUM.

” , PETITXONERS

* Sri. M S RAJENDRAPRASAD 8s ASSFS, ADVS.)

VA 1′ STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY DODDAPET POLICE
SHIMOGA

with an intention to harass these accused has falsely implicated
accused Nos.2 to 5. He submitted that, proceedings insofar as
accnsed Nos.2 to 5 are concerned who are befoxve
reqlfims to be quashed. J ‘V

3. The learned Government Plcatier Vv ”
complainant has made specific
to 3 as regaxtls to harassment bf
he submitted that, as against Nosflfi no V
specific allegations. n u ‘A V4

4. No doubt the of accused

Nos.1 to 5 as rcsi:ii;1g ‘–in em; in this petition,

however of the petitioner Nos.3
and 4 as Alur, Andhra Pxadcsh and

Belgaum, — ,

A into the complaint as it is. the alkzgation is

to 3. There is no allegation as against

V a_z3cuse€i’—-Nos}4 5 who are petitioner 15303.3 and 4, apart from

~ ‘fix; comfilainaflt has not made any afiegafion as regards to

Nos.3 and 4 am concern for an o%ncc punishable

Section. 498A or under Sccfions 3 and 4 of Dowxy

” -Pfohibition Act. W

T:

6: Considering the same. insofir as petitioner Nos.3 anti 4
are concerned, pmoecdings stands quashw. However,

pmcecdings shall go on as against petitioner Nos. 1 and 2. – ‘

*AP/ –