High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Uma @ Sushila vs Sharanabasappa on 20 October, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Smt Uma @ Sushila vs Sharanabasappa on 20 October, 2008
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
13131': GADAG.   _

(By Sri. S M KALWAD FOR R1-V2)V

_ THIS CRLP IS FILED "R/46:' 
PRAYING T0 TRANSFER THE' €_,C.NG.;2S6/05$»'PiE¥sIDlN(} cm 

THE FILE 0? THE JMFG, 'KG?PAL; KOFfPAL""..D§S'I';", 'I'()*~ 

JMFCL, MANVI, DIS"F.RAICHUR.L' _V

THIS CRIMINAL '1:s:E'1%ri%1§m" iTjCbMm<3 on P012
ADMISSION, THIS 1_3AY,V%%V1:as;a =*c-arm MADE mm
:='oLLowmG;J    _  I  

  wife of the 1" mspondmt
seeking'   'V 3 in C.C.No.2S6/2005 on the

 the Jtéifl;  to the JMFC, Manvi in Raichur

'ls_'I'i1e petitioner is the complainant in

c.c.~»;§%.%5/was am-gng that Respondents 1 and 2 have

57 thc ofieenoes punishabk: under Section 494 and

109 ofthc 190, pending before rm JMFC, Koppal. According

to the petitioncr, she is employed as a tcachcr in the service

under the State and is trazlsfermd to work as a teacher in

M

‘\_/

the Government Lower Primary Dr. BR. Ambedkar

Manvi, Refmhur District, and hence, the

In addition. learned counsel for the

= the failure on the part of the xnexéépogagnt D7 A’

Petition 47/ 2005 on the me
transfcrnzcl to’ the at by under

dated 12–o2—2oos in ca. Court.

which are not dmputed
by learn’ Respondents I and 2, it goes
withqut that’-:h5s’pea’fion deserves to be allowed and

% ‘ g on the file ofthc JMFC, Koppel is

wuithgiiawnv AA ” tnans. fiermd to the JMFC, Mam’ in Rabhnr

” Eiietziei for finther proceedings, in aeocmzianee with hair. The

are dkected to appear before the JMFC, Manvi for

‘ V pmcewings on 3«l1~2fl08, without farm notice.

The JMFC, Koppal is directed to transmit the rccoxtis in

imi

C.(f.No.256[20*OS to the JMFC, Manvi, _

with a dimction to call the case on M3311-20:33.» jy. A «

Iudqe

KS