E . IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNf~a'T'AE§A. A'-E' BA':\§<i:ALoR€ DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY 1: 7 A V THE: HONBLEZ MR¢JUsT1cE;vL4F}§.1\I.KBs%~1.Av:Ag§A1§A%ANA CRL.P.N0.2254=.QF. 2011 - :: BETWEEN: ' A 1.
Pradeep Kumar, A
8/0 Nanjundaiah, V
Aged abou1″_3O yé’a1Vs.[”
Occ: Bus’i;s3Véss. ‘
2. Raje3n’dfa._Pr2;saVd;._ –..__. V *
S/0 Na1éj1,1_ndéia}L–.,v’}_A ,,
Aged._:;iboui:1§:3’O years,
‘Occj .Busin¢’sS.
Bcth’ are Residif1’g__ait
N0.844_V, N.H..C.A:3_.’Lay0ut,
; ‘ ‘I.G.Cro$$; “Water Tank Road,
‘ B_as2;\feshwara.nagar,
Bangalore. Petitioners
A [By S1<i;'Sh'e1{ar.:~Kumar and Sri.P.Prasanna Kumar,
Adi»*Ocafe'§§*:_
A State of Karnataka,
" By Yeiahanka Poiice Station,
Bangalore City,
Bangalore.
Represented by State Public Prosecutor,
High Court Buiidingg
Banga1ore~58{} O01.
hi)
2* it/I.Goutharn Chand,
S/o Mothilal,
Aged about 50 years,
Residing at 330.1245 / 1,
M/s. Goutharn Jewellers,
R.T.Streett Avenue Road Cross,
Chiekpet, _ _ . V V ,
Bangalore-560 O53. ..v.;.._Res-pomieiits
[By Sri.B.Raja Subramanya Bhat;
Sri.M.T.Nanaiah <3: Sri.Shaii.1_§a~rappa', £f'xCiVoeate_s'*fo.r -R-2] V '
This Criminal Petition—is:fi1e€1_ un'd'er._Se.otion 482
Cr.,P.C. praying to the' investigation in Crime
No.27/201 1 of Ye1ahank_a'P'o1i'ee Stati~on»,.Banga1ore.
This Criminal admission on
this day, gv<:o';:;1irtt madethe _fo1]yo"w'i1'i*g'i
learned counsel who filed
this petition on petitioner filed a memo of
reti_i'enient that the petitioners have taken no
along with entire ease papers to engage other
'~A€}yoeate"_v».in~ythis petition. However, the memo is not
aoeornpanied with any acknowledgement issued by any
2 V. xotthe petitioners for having taken back the Case papers
"with an intention to engage some other eounsei. No
' other counsel haégeiitereci appearance on behalf of the
3,»
petitioners: Yherefore, rnereiy on the basis of the memo
_/ \
; z
filed by the learned counsel for the pe*:itior1e:"s:..Ais
new on record he cannot be perrriitteid' to:"'reti,r'ei
Therefore, the rrierrio for retirerr1erit.i_S re;eCt'edfv» V'
2. Sri.Prasanna Kurnar, 1earjr1’ed eo.:i-riseiifoi’ utiief
petitioners seeks one week’V”tirri»e to is.<s_i:'e-iiotice to the
petitioners and file ~r_etireIriei1.tj'rIi'erno. Having regard
to the fact that this Coti_rt interim order
on 7.4.201:1;'i.or:; aceourit ~,o"1"v _j_v-the said order, the
investigationij.7"p:e'riiiir1g'iffbefore V jurisdictional police
I?
have:’h’ee’I1a. ‘ the prayer made by the
learned “CO1iI1–SiS.1.’.i\_.13€ti'[iO1’1€1″S for further time
cannot bVe”*a%ccede,d “Hence the said prayer is rejected.
Si;rre.eEthe1earried._..counse1 for the petitioners expresses
iriabii«i_tjr .__to argue on merits, the petition is
‘{iisri1isser7:ip*… it
fit; W
t:§ 54$
tiii “”;”-~i
W