High Court Karnataka High Court

Abdul Khadar S/O Davasab Sasawada vs The State Of Karnataka By … on 25 March, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Abdul Khadar S/O Davasab Sasawada vs The State Of Karnataka By … on 25 March, 2009
Author: K.L.Manjunath And Malimath


IN THE HiGH COURT 0? ‘ ‘ 5 “‘ ”

CIRCUIT BENCH A’: DHARWA9 ‘- 1: ”

DATE!) 1*:-us THE 25′-*3 may 0;?

PRESENT . :, : 1,
TKE Horram: MR. Jtisafitrxs; r{.i..’–.h;*_I’1aV5t§r_:t:i§i°;§?i*i'{‘

THE HGWBLE !VVIRi.7JU7r3_’!’3€.{}.E” MALIMATH

;(§_13_1MIN.._g_L.;iFF§},&£;’ n:a.1¥:9;}fgéo5

smwman:

g3D:}L5«:H.a:>;a~R
S/’£3. D,}X’«!A§,S;£2E%’ ;SAS.%§2;%.§3.:%,

Cir. Plug. 1a.32r:’:., <:£r«:%;A*:2_.¢;:;'%w::3;21'–:~:<::rJ
P.€3.HEN£'%ALAGA, "

BELGAUM;» –

., _ …&?PE’;LL&N”E’
zaysigi. v:JAw;:<:1:v;;aE as 32;. i}MfiSHAE\§KAE, mvs;

'?HE;=.$'E'A'}.'E; F{&RNA'?AKA,
1' * RESPGNBERT

" " " .«.€s;m; :43 .?s3E'APAK, ASA}

TEES CEEEMENAL APPEAL. PREFERRED BY '?'§§E ABOVE}

: " :f:€}NVICTfAPPEL§,ANT§;aCC:USED TEORUGEE THE
.. SU?E3§§I\f'§'EE'~$E)EN"{; CENTRAL, mzgazv, BELGAUM, 12¢

S¢{1»NO.13/'.2G7${} QN 'TEE REE,-E £3?' 'THE E £%.D§LvSJ; DHARWAE,
SITTENCE £35? é-EUBLE, BATES 4;§Q42O{}€f3 CQNVEQYTING THEE

-2-

A?PELL&NT;CGVNVKHVRCCUSED §OR wan OFPENCE
§%H%SHABLE UNDER SEC?¥flQ££Q OF fi{iAND sENTE§3NG
w%?fi}UNDERGGE%GGNmflfi§§FE§M?mSGNMENTFQ§THE

o?FENcE§yU;s3m2@F§H:ANEwn3?A¥AzfiNE<fiéRS;gfixq§,

H1,fi3UNDERGQ}%§?ORANGTfiERTHRfi§MQNTHfia ""

THE Afi§%LflflflNG ON Fbé GP§ER& fag EAKH

MANJUQATHii,BEHVERED'Nfl3FQELO%fiNG:7."
JUnGm§§g
The accuaed has.ffl.edé..ti1ié _:a§§é$a1 ciiaflcnging the

srcier of conviction and seiité123'e'Vp.a$$¢d;V"b§r {he Sessions

Judge; S:, O:..§£<)_. 3531} 2000 dated 4.10.2900,

wherein" ihasé éonvicteri for the eifenca

comggiztgd 4ij:1rixér'1Sé;:ti;§n 332 me am he ms been

»sex:;i;m¢%::d té«,_;1nderg0 1"ig{}I'O'E3.S lifa izngsriganrnent for the

L" Qffisfiaa. V V

:3, The appeiiani by arigaging an Advccata 0? km

had {led an apyeal mfare '{:11é$ {hurt in {3i£"§I}"i§I}3}

Ne..i257/2098, which appeal has been

dismissed 0:: merits an };'?.:2£}®4. Again, the present

&,

appeai is filed thmugh jail. in the Ci.i'C11II1S7viT,Ei}J:I@;f§3 .:'4i; f?g}i'§&

matter is listed befare us.

3. Havirig heard the co:3ns€;_l[,EE§r fi3TeI”§}}éx.;”tVié S;~,.j§%iv’§é:.

nzfiice that the judgmem of1S¢.ssier1sVCm1:*:V h;ii:S”&31″:eady”V ‘

baen csnfrmeci in Ciingitzal /.2{);3{§ dated
£.’7.20()4. Ir: the circgLi:z;§§t:,af;§: é§ré§v appeal an the
same j{1Cig1I1€.:I1’$::’1’,1f$f{)}f:1″?LVV’V?:}”1iFi%§:: nlaintainable.

15;CCOI'diI1g]}=~       as not

Sd/....
Iudgé

Sd/-g
Iudgé

  .V bit: