High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt H R Rajamma vs H R Rangegowda on 15 November, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Smt H R Rajamma vs H R Rangegowda on 15 November, 2010
Author: C.R.Kumaraswamy
IN THE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALOR'£TE"'»a.

DATED THIS THE 15" DAY OF NOVEMBER   if 

BEFORE

THE HOIWBLE MR. JUSTICE c.Rf KU:MAR'AS'S]tiAiV1'{VVv._:fi:.,_vi'

CRIMINAL REVISION PEV»TI_TIOl'\';'..gA\,.|'C):983/393; ° 

BETWEEN:

Smt. H.R. Rajamma,

W/o E-LR. Rangegowda,

Aged about 52 years, - _ .
Occupation: Househoid vwork;"  - 
Residing at No/$15;   2: 
Kantoor Road, 1_SF.r%1airifVR*Oacf,_' __ 
Gokulam 3"' Sta€ge,_f"'__' " .    
Mysore-570  '«1.,__ _   "  .. Petitioner

(By Sri. Prasxanunaktu ma 1" A:?.,»t'A~d:yo.cate)
AND: A V

 H..R."Ran5gegOwda, ttttt N
V':_S/O"Late.,Rangappa,
Aged ab(>_§;t_y 56 yea rs,
Re'5id'i.n'g at .E3..N'o.'415,
13' Main, 3"'_Stage, Gokuiam,
-Mysore.'  '

, .112;   .r.y.>,y.-,.,-.4,

'-- T S/to .Range Gowda,
--...'.Ag'ed about 33 years,

  .,RVeSiding at D.No.415,
 15' Main, 3"' Stage, Gokulam,

« 'Mysore.



. Cheluvegowda,

S/o late Vykuntegowda,
Aged about 52 years,
PWD Contractor,
Ramakrishna Layout,
Chennarayapatna,
Hassan District.

. Sahana

W/o H.R. Raju,

Aged about 28 years,
Residing at D.No.415,
1'" Main, Kanto Road,
3"' Stage, Gokulam,
Mysore.

Mysore. 

. Kamalakumar Mai--.:iaEa,..i 
S/0 K.K. Man'dara,.__ ' ' '

Aged 41 years, _ , A
Residirjgat D.No_.4'1.5',

'_.,.Kanto«.i3oa'd, 1" M'a.in,_
. 3V.dAStagei,."sGo'kulam,
":_M»ys'o~.re.   2 ~-

. Trze Avétatev of'_"i<a'i:r2'ataka,

By Vaynivilaspura 9.5.,

 ~VReprese.nteVd by State
I '~___Public Prosecutor,
 " _P-ig'h"C_ourt Building,
 ,BaAri~g.a_lore~S6O O01.

. Dr. Chandrashekar M.D.,
Adithya Hospital, 

.. Respondents

This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under sectie_n–397
and 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure praying to set.ria4Sid.e’~»tvhe

}uclgment and Order of acquittal dated 18.8.2008 the
IV Additional I Civil Judge (}r.E)n.,) & M’ye.drief’-:a_Va_

C.C.No.12-4/O6.

This Criminal Revision Petition coming onfor’A’orders«’§i[/1’iVs’»wtV

day, the Court made the followino.~..,i_””~~

O,.,F§ Q E'”;§- V

The trial Court has acquitted’,’the rest-vojndents/accused for
the offence punis§ha’hT.le’~ under Section-34 of

Indian Penal Code.Tffhe5pet’itifiotn’er/§:oVn7gp’lainant has preferred a

Criminal of Criminal Appeal. The office
has raised anxojbjecftion”:rne’n’t~i:o4nVi’.ng that the Criminal Revision
Petition “i’.s”not umaVinVta’i’naivjle..’ against the order of acquittal.
Consequently, this Criminal Revision
id

Sd/-

JUDGE