2 5. JAYAPPA s/0 KALLAPPA AGE:58 MARIGGUDAR, AGRIL, R/O KUDAL VILLAGE TAL: HANGAL, mgr HAVERI 6. SHIVARUDRAPPA AGE: MAJOR KARIBASAPA PARASHE'£"I_'I R/0 KUDAL VILLAGE ' M * TAL: HANGAL, DIST HAvEs;1"~. 7. BAsAVANNEPPA3;.o PI5TrA?£§ BIRAJI AGE58 OCC:AGRIL, .. < R/0 KUDA1; VILLA€.'~E"= ' TAL: 1-1,<».;1m¢1'.--_-,_ I)I:S'I' HAfVE.R'I V' 7' " 8. §°ARA¥viESHA¥§'PA_ S/9 MANAPPA*BA!)_It3cE.RI 0cc::AG»re1L;-- R'/Q DEVIHOSUR, fmL. FfAVEIRI DI:3T HAVERI pmrrxonsas « _ (BY: 3 HAl5'éA"%!I}--« - Apigf " V pauufi . Tram STATE OF KARNMAKA BYAHAVER; RURAL POLECE STATION, !~l:'\.";fER!, DIST: HAVERI. 2 n 'T REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR _,--HEGH COURT CIRCUIT BENCH, DHARWAD. RESPONDENT
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FiLEB U/S.-482 CR.P.C BY
THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYTNG THAT THIS
HOPPBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED T’O:A) QUASH THE FIR
fl\,{L.,¢..
3. That there are several disputes betsveejrr
110.1 and 2, and the complainant, rela_oTn;gL_:’~toi
properties is respect of
including w.P.No.3o662/zoos. Iii’ xitI*1i.eh alnlsrgs
to maintain status-quo. the thus, the
complainant has dispossess
the petitioners who land. In other
words, no case is made
out for ‘ration against them as the
dispuwte : property and is of civil
nature. l
‘ counsel refers to the proceedings in the
also the proceeding before the Land
elated 27.5.1992 vide Am1exure–D regarding
A 5.’ of the parties in respect of the immovable property.
V’ Elie submits that the only modus operandi of the
complainant is to ensure that the petitioners are levelled
with false charges so as to obtain possession of the land
gr
6. Hence, the petition is s’@c’ bf
admission. ‘ ‘ V’ V V’
JUDGE
VI’P/-
