SRI GURUPUTRAPPA NEELAKAIVTAPPA
AGED 46 YEARS, OCC : PARTNER, '
M/S SIDDESHWARA AND 00., STATION no.«*u§-%%i{%
HUBLE.
SR1 CHANDRAKANTH NEELA;PA CHINNAPPA KAMMAR
Aem. 69 YEARS, 'ace : PARTNER,
' Mjs SIEEDESHWARA AND co., STATION ROAD,
" }:{f_J,'3j_,I, " _____
é J s.Ri% §«1AH_AL1NGAPpA cnmmmvva KAMMAR
'' AGED 62-YEARS, occ ; PARTNER,
M/sjs1,m>EsHwARA AND co., STATION ROAD,
§§!U.'3Li'.
" siél SIDDAPPA NEELAKANTAPPA KAMMAR
AGED 49 YEARS, OCC : PARTNER,
M/S SIDDESHWARA AND 00., s'rA'rIoz~: ROAD,
HUBLI.
dam
10. SR! KRISFALINGAPPA GANGAPPA KAMMAR
AGED 39 YEARS, OCC : PARTNER,
M] S SIDDESHWARA AND 00., STATION ROAD,
HUBLI.
11. SR} VEERAPPA VEERABHADRAF-'PA
SHEELAVANTHAR
AGED MAJOR, OCC: CLERK, . V
M/S SIDDESI-IWARA AND C;,..s3'rAi{':oN 'ROfAI3,._f,
HUBLI. E '
% A ..,,r<E$1$or~i'DEE9i'.'3,
(By Sn" : A A KALEBUDDE, FOR 'R4 n
SMT R.A. GUNDIMIN, ADv._Eor~z,R~5
SR! SHIVASHANKAE R _AM_Bi;I.,.AD1(. FOI§'AR~V--L2
R-6 TO 11"2'%RE. ABA?-ED; A
TEES" CEi'MI"1¢ALVE'§%.ETrr1oN IS FILED U/3.432 CR.P.C,
PRAYILNG "rs; SET ASIDE THE ORDER D'r.s.7.o6 PASSED
E¥,T};E p.o.,"F*r£::1I, DHARWAD IN CRL.RP.NO.96/04 AND
_'rEE 'ORDER m'.3x.3.o4 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE
‘ JMFC;1i[jCCU.RT, HUBLI IN C.C.N0.899/1987 AND TO
. R_ES’FORE THE FILE on THE RECORDS OF THE COURT OF
}Jl§aiFCjII”A~C(5URT, HUBLI, AND FURTHER DIRECT THE
‘r”E–1AE”CDUEr TO PROCEED IN THE MATTER IN
ACCDEDANCE wrm LAW.
THIS CRIMINAL PETYPION COMING OR FOR
M HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
<7"/"/*
This petition is filed under :§¢c:i§'n
aside the order datfi .198'? u L'
by JMFC, II Court, Hubli Track
Ceurt-Ii Dharwae in epeafign Ne.96/ 2004
vide order dated 0S.07.fif§0'6'." .2 2
2. The and the
mspondcnte the trial Court. Accused
No.1 a Accused No.2 to 10 were its
the dark working in the fimt
. filed a complaint under
Cr. against the accused for the offences
ézgeer Section 277, 276(0) and 273 and 278-3 of
thTe._ Income?’ Act. The trial Court noticed that except
16,7 ,9, and 10, the remaining accused are dead and
each the pmocedings against them were abated. During
pendency of this proceedings, accused N07 died and as
such the proceedings against hira also is bated. New the
‘\/’*”‘\,
proceedings are only against the accused No. 1 firm, accused
No.2, 4 and 5 who are the partners of the finza.
3. Heard the co1mse.1′:; «.A
petitioner] accused and 1esponden,ts_ 3
4. It is seen from the that fe;fVt1;é”~.§1ssessment’ V
year 1983-1984 the bong
thereafter, the ‘M mistake in the
returns filed pvbyihthe brought
to notice “”abont the mistake in the returns
filed by t11e:3:.,Vthey”ta’i,r1yi};:imitted and 1n)’ mediately submitted
a. and paid the taxes as per the revised
»A circumstances, both the Courts below held
~. has failed to prove the culpable state of
intention or motive on the part of the accused in evading the
he payment of taxes. Further, it is noticed that all the accused
htthaee not paxticipated in the preparation of filing of the
returns with the Income Tax Authority. Consequenfly, both
the Courts belew discharged the accused for the charges
Oxuv
leveled against them. : find no justifiahlc
with the same. Accordingly, the pgtifipn ‘hexéijy ~
JH*