High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Jagadeesha S/O Venkatappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 September, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri Jagadeesha S/O Venkatappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 September, 2008
Author: N.K.Patil
Ii! 'HE EEGH CCKIKY €313' KARNATAKA, BAHG:ALO%
BATEI3 "EH13 THE 5"' DAY CJF SEPIEMEER 2008
BEFGRE

T1:-m HUIPELE rm. Jusrms R.K.PA'I'IL %%7 i ;   K

 

SE1 JRQNDEEBHA,
MGVEIEKATAPPA,
man mmrr an-mm, T
Raiding at 110.20.  '  
BAHGHLQRE - 52.  5

V   VV ".;;'.':PE'1"I'I"IOHER
cm am. Anvmam

_ &M4

1.. ma aramkar  
REP. Wm  M _ 
REVENIIE ammumam 
L31 3. num_.ir;mc:. nmamnms - en.

32:; A 'mm.  j:m:mTr com&3xo1mn.
  wmmmsm.

:   

Tfiffiflifig'-Vfiflefiiffiiafififififl,

  %. %1{;J.nwmmmaE;~LRzr. mum
 k ?315."E €i§I'_IVE'V9FFlCER.

  4;.  12: itvmwmswaanxan,
'  $10 Lam K 1? mummnmafi.
T mmnjmomwmnsm,

.um...nm may Iufififi mm;



Budding at 130.43,

"3 R&", 13'" GROQQ,
V GA&
EEHGRLGRE -~ 52.

5. am xmrx xurwsn Iammx,
310 mm H 3 mama,

ma-En AEOWE +9 mam,

cm mmmux mmwamr
mmmfiz, vammmmmm,
mxmmnfi,

5. smw mama,

3; C? K wms1Ra.%,
was mat}? 7a mm,
naming at m>..1a9,

1 1'99 mm mm.
V GfiR
mncmwzzm -- 52.

an am 32'! A   , i "V

W2: EAAH».Ifi:ll$¥PE'_ , ~ 

AGED man?    Q  '

Ralidim at muaié,  
amm lEARI:3"THI1I'fi.AYA;.V

am cms.s.. %1ar=a mm;%ao.g:>',TkTi%j% _
magma' EX'1'ER¥f£Q_E 

 RE~"&Q; _ ._ 

3,' am ngfimmnirgg 

  ..... 

new in
Rmamg at. 39,?

1:215′ m:::;s23,’A.

mmmmmzgx-;:a.

¢ ‘V 9.;-« VETRIKATESH,
Fu.fi’§’E. ‘T’ CEAHGAPPA,
‘ new fi£§”a£{)§3Z’ samm,
‘ Ti .__Rwé1;:1g at NDA5,
T C-§JlIlP’LEX,

or the 2m mpommz, and further sought a awn

dimcting ma-pendants 1 and 2 tr: mappoint zxnezszrzbexu fn–2°.._

the Gmmttm of Matmgomm of the 31*’ ~ V.

Tbmphe as per Rubs cantsmpinmed in M

Ramona Inatitufiom and Charit;é.’51¢”‘

Rules, 9002.

2.. The anly
mm: «mm pcbtizion is to be a
mmmm (sf and also 3
devmtm mm me jurmfietional
and ®armb1a

2:302. has ou:nr:::t11′.ed’ the

by umaia oz-cm passed by

the petit’.1m1e:z” has pra@d thin

3″ ‘I’m Maximal Additional ¢.3o Mlvoeata

appearmg 123:’ the rampondmt 1393.1 and ‘2, 91¢ the oumefc

auhmszm that, am pram sought by me j;.”%%%1

liable 53:: be re3ec’ ma an m.imnmm’ :1, an the *

he is a devotee and 3 not cmitled

impuwd paaaad by time .. “l’¢!’:’: V’

suhabamiatm his submission, “aub1§fitt§,’fi

ah:nflan* matter filed by
damaaa by this Qosurt in
WWPI N::.1§459f that
pmd5mnar bf merits.

m. on the grounds urged by
in light :31′ the subrxnma’ inn made

bf t A%ae, as

T mm ; “fha X petmm’ ‘ filed by the petitioner is
‘ dmmid of naaerm following me: order passed

dam-.d mas-zoos in w.P. no.1145912ooa

{firi J Hiahme Kama: V8. 1113 Smte. of Kanxatalmj and

fau’t3t1eraa%nm%fl:er’a’n»

15.10.2003

OZRDEF-21 éi

[mR%ji3 E:us SPOKEN TO ”

This n1;itter”w§s–_ of by this Court earlier on
5&7. _Se;f§fén?’.§Aie:*v. ‘éridv thereafter, this case is posted
today.

appearing for petitioner, at the

‘ i,»-Vs’2§£t*a-¢t,LsLji’s:?:A*§itted that, the order passed by this Court on

‘V 53?’ Septiémber 2008 following the order passed by this

in W.P.No.11459/2008 disposed of on 27*” August

dismissed as devoid of merits, Accordingly, it

dismissed. The order passed by this Court

September 2808 in this petition sustains

intact.

3udge

BMW’

I H913 V)lV.!.VNHV)I $0 .I.llflO3 H9!!! V)|\1.l.VNllV)l :lO .I.HflO3 HQIH V’.)IV.|.VN8\’I)l £0 .l.8l’IO3 H913-‘I V)lV.I.VNllV)| :10 RIHOD HQIH \1)iV.l.\’IN2l\’.0l :10 .I.&l’¥O3 HE!!!-I