IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT BAN§?;AL§}R§;’». V’
DATE1) THIS THE 26th MY 0:2′ :;~;r1}£Rc}v:, ‘:.;0£>9. f V
BEFORE;
THE HOIWBLE MR.JUSTl{3′–E ‘}{ RAMANNA
CRIJBHNAL REVISIO1¥:Plj3’T1fl”IO1¥’ #0,’ T912/§{}0?
BETWEEN:
1
S/0 Khajafizib iigizand. ua:h;_1.i–itti _’
‘.2 Fafimabi. 1’
W I 01 Khajasaij;
– both’arm:a”g.€;K»b.;£:e¢b buflding
Tabxhlami, Ma:s.t1i;%”Rbaci
..«.{Hu’b~}j- 330.020 V
– gharwafi Dist.-. _____ Petitioners
V V T_ if Shastzy 5:. Ravi Hcgdt:,Advs.)
. . ._ ] ‘ ._V The of Kaxnataka
A. By Héarihar Ttwm Felice Station
_Han’hm
Baéranagere Dist.
Raziya Begum
D /0 Manflansab Realm’
3 1 yrs, r] opp to Khazriya Maszid
fiovemment Hosjpitai Road
A
_/ .
J’ “)
Indizanagar, Harihaar
Savanagere Dist. 3
(By Sri B Balalnisixiia, ii ‘A f: = ”
This criminal revision pctificm is liI¥C¥_crvV.:.S::c£ir;’n
397(2) Cr.P.C‘.. praying to quash ti21:””ordcr tiaieei .i?.2–‘1E¢~f2()0′}’
in C.C.No.?6{}/2006 on the file of’-..(31:v.i_} Jucigeg (Jr.I311) 6:;
JMFC, Harihar cm chaigéfi’ the petitioners.
This criminal revisioni1f§c:ii’fiéniiiics)1:3iIfigA’_e;i {gr admission
this day, the Court mafia theufoifinwing; ‘ ‘ ” i
The irijavciviffiiymc up with this
revision 22~O1–200′? passed in
c.c.No.7§O’; cm; Judge (Jr Dvn) 85
JMFC, against the petitioners for
” é1:..ofiti3iE:ci..Apuni$habiéViiiiticr sections 4934. 5:. 506 IPC rcaci
HCGP submits that aficr framing chargcs,
ii 3*c:,§pm:1g:ieI:t”‘ ‘prosecution has examined the witnesses and
aiiéiicciisicitxing the evidence, the trial Court acquittcezli the
wiiiliionsrs from the charges leveled against them as per its
VA jiztignciczxt datcd i38-2~2008.
‘ i;
3. In View of the abcwc suhmissien, flit:-pzffiétéilf ‘
petition dues not survzv’ :3 and it is a<:;.i€c§ii£i:11f,_§13»*'-.¢di.*.;:£:Tifs*s§:=t;ziVv"air
the stage: of admissian.
ah-SI}