High Court Karnataka High Court

Shri Umesh Vishwanath Katti vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 November, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Shri Umesh Vishwanath Katti vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 November, 2008
Author: N.Ananda
in THE HIGH mum' cw KARNATAEQA-1 _

cmcurr BENCH AT snmwfiéa : 7   "

DATED THIS THE 181'" DAY. OF Naifszfifififi;  K  

BEFff)l2E:'_'_' T A. 9'

THE HOWBLE :«xm.,;Usi*sCi3; H,  
CR;.P.N(_>_;"?3vag.[_»20d8 «. . 1' % V'

BETWEEN:

1. Shri  Vishwa::f:ath"Kat:;i,
,Agn=  
 R/0:   $9,,
 :  

    nayawaae,
' Age: 35 yeags, Owe: Bus%&,

5i'«2;#%5M<l<eIi. Dim: Edwin-

 Datwya Hammdc,
 years, Ooc: Buaiuma,
..R/«so: Sanktcshwar-591 309,

 AA  Tq: Hukkeri, Dist: Barman.

 4. Shri mm N111' gappaKo4h',

Age: 5'?' years, Ooc: Agi,
R10:  -591 309,
Tq: Hukkeri, [Tut Belgaum. .. PETi'I'i0NERS

(By B.S.Kmtc, Axlvocah:-)



AND:

Th: Siatc of Karnamm, 1 '
Thmugh Subdnapector of ' g,
Sacnkeshwar Poiicc Station, 7
Repmscnted by Staa:  Pmswufior;  
High Court Building, cizcuit'a;::xa:;1,  '

(By Sri pmmw '  

" '.;--.REémNDEm'

 is filezi  432 Cr.P. C. praying
to call  pmonctls of the case and qaash
the cnmmal' ' _    3&3' t the yeti ' in
C.C.__Bjl_9.22C33}'2&)_g0 8   Sankeshwar P.S., Crime
mg;'149i2(,m3  the file m'  Judge {Jr.Dn.) am
JMFC,  ail further pmce-ed'mgs in the said

'i*1a:$  on for admasion this day, the

 made 13:,-' follmving:

ORDER

azmyed as accused 1 to 4 have fled

_ T to quash cm: proceedings in C.C.No.263/2068
H trial for ofiirnces pnnishaiale under Scciions 143,

147, 171(F) I.P.C., Section 136{1)(§ of Representatives of

Peoplcs Act r/W. 149 I.P.C.

2. I have heard Sri Bski, for
petitioners. The learned Counsel for %

submit, akgatkms made in the’

witnesses do not consiitufzfi xv ‘ . % ‘_ at ‘A J

petitioners, muchlms pf ‘
continuation of would be
abuse ofpmocss ‘A izfiiot to accept
mg: mama;

% mm tgn-.__§5f4Poli2e, amen-.

‘ ” III odsztents of oonmlaint would reveal, -during
mm of 20/21.5.2003 at about 2.90

-._a.m., when the complainant was on election
‘piiuty, he found the camiaatewn behafl’ of ms
party film Umcsh Vishwwth Katti Md h’m
followers, mallahout mm 15mhersonom*:
side and the candidate on belwifofflowm (I)
paItynmc1yRa§agoudaPati1andhis£3%ers
ontheothcrsidcwt:1=cquarrcBingncarAPMC
yard at Sankeshwar. They were qumncfling
1ega:vd’mg election campaip. Th: Circle
Inspector of Police told the candidam that

m.4¢wWb.,.,

elmtion had

5.00 p.1’n. on 20.5.2008 Lfizeni
disburse. Aocoxding,’iy”‘l}ath fhc ”

folkrwers cm u~;.¢ r-semi” ‘

3. The learned *wouid’= ef
the complaint and stajyemmjts 60 net attract any
of the oficnce}. ” = 2 Penal Code or

Rcpmscntati:ies–.qf V’ I

the compiaint would t
gen.e:-a1_’c.teect% ‘m= heki on 22.5.2008. During” the
ix;tervenmg;”” n1g§1″‘ t “oi” ‘§0/21.5.2008 at about 2.00 a.m.,

may and Congess (I) ificrs and

V i had formed an 1 assembly md they

.’ A regarding eimmn

. in these circumsmnces, it is not possfilc to hot},

V’ ‘»eliegafions of the complaint are fiivolous and vexatious anti

they do not aonstitute ofifenaccs 211% against

Themfiom, I do not find any reasons to qliash the

proceedings. iv . .

Ets*

Therefore, the petition is