Posted On by &filed under High Court, Karnataka High Court.


Karnataka High Court
Farukh Khadar Jamadar vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 January, 2010
Author: Arali Nagaraj
iNTHE}flGH(XHflWTOFKARNATAKA(HRCUTTBENCH
ATDHARWAD

DATED Tms THE 29"" DAY or JANUARY 2010 

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARALI NA'G__A?E1::Ax§:.i_i.''~ 1% '  '

CRL.P. N0. 8193/2s 009iip' «A 

BETWEEN:

Farukh Khadar Jarnadar __

Age: Major, Occ:  5
R/o. Kahanapur, Dist: Be1gaU.'ni1-.- *   
V    V' --   ._5...Petitione1'.
(By Sri.Bahubali A, Dpavnawade,' 'z;Mi.v'o.e~ateL)«~:. 

AND: Vp'pag." """

The State of:'V'Ka1'.natai{a;'vs   '

Represented by 'Dharwa"--  

 _  v_ ...Respondent.
(By. Sri.P..fjH.Gotkhin'd_i,p HCVGP.)

frmsiici:is{iis{stpreemies is filed U/S.482 Cr.P.C. by the

1"s,_advoca'te"fo1' thejjpietitioner' praying that this Hon'b1e Court
rnay be "'p1ea_vsed¥'to quash the impugned order of taking
.._ipi'oQgnizanee5 dated 5/E./2008, passed in C.C.No.3'7/2008 and
4_e'on'seq.ue_ntly'"quash the charge sheet filed for the offences

_   U/Secs.406, 467, 471, 420 r/w.Sec.34 of1PC, in
'*f=._so._far"~.asthe petitioner is concerned and grant such other

"re*~1ief.__?

'/'"-~«/""\.n'



I\.)

This petition coming on for admission this day,_..___the
Court made the following: 7 
ORDER

Though this matter is listed today for ‘ad:miV’sVsiii’ciin;

having regard to the nature of the

matter is taken for final disposal by coinsent of1.tl?1ei Vi1ei’arriei(ji

counsel for the petitioner and tihe_l’leVarne’d Court
Government Pleader. g

2) Perused the impugin«ed’ii..io,rd’iei-..idated 5/1/2008

passed in cognizance of the
offences puniishiable2.iU;XSeic”s.iVZi’ili6, 467, 471 and 420

r/wtSec.3-éléggjof l.PCia’g.a_i_iinst all the accused therein including

the’p_res’ent peiitiitioinnevr who is accused No.5.

3)ii’,__TIt ivS.iisiu.blrnitted by the learned counsel for the

–‘«p’.evti««t__iCu.ner th’a,t_if the said Criminal Case is at the stage of

.,,/._:’–g_h*eariing’argurnents before the charge. When that is so, the

would be at liberty to seek an order of discharge

iiiii’~v,iL”asii”provided U/Sec.239 of Cr.P.C., since the offences

cw”/'”””””””‘”‘”””

alleged against him are warrant cases and the procedure for

trial of Warrant cases has to be adopted by the Trial

4) Hence the present petition is dispo.s.eI,3u_:”flVf

-~””””‘ am”

liberty to the petitioner to sleek o3Ep1ep…oi;fi’lidihsohafgle-,__laVs1T.l

N .

provided U/Sec.239 of Cr.P.C. ‘filing’pro-per~’Va1:i.pl,igat.lori

before the Trial Court.

H%r_§ :§,{r Sd/;

– ;»,r;JUDGE

Mrk/-


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

39 queries in 0.237 seconds.