Sri Manu And Manukumar S/O … vs State By Town Police on 23 November, 2010

I
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 23"' DAY OF NOVEMBER 

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JuSTIcE c R KUMAR.AVS*JVA:M:x'I"_

CRIMINAL REVISION RETITIDNI ND.;353jDE  

BETWEEN:

SRLMANU @ MANUKUMAR
S/O DOMMALINGE sow A

MAJOR IN AGE .   ' I I 
RESIDING AT GoVERNME.N"r_HQSRITAL» L I 'I 

GAYATHRIGL,AYOI5;T  I ._ '.  
OPP: CGINT_RACT RI"-a,J;AN*:\IA'«HOU's--E.... 
cHANa,_VARAYARATNA.V  -- ..PETITIONER
(BY SRI":'C_ R So'RALA;iS\N'AM}*'&"ASSTS, ADV)

$111; » _

I I  STATEEV TOWN POLICE
; » CHANNA'RAYA'P.ATNA
  'F<,E.P'i*D_."'3aY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

~HI'€E_H CDL;vRT'Eu'ILDING
BA__NGALQRE--fi 560 001 ...RESPONDENT

~~TH:.IS CRLRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 AND 40: OF

  CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
OERDER DATED 08.10.2010 IN SC NO.24/2006 PASSED BY THE
. 'PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT, CHANNARAYAPATNA
I AND THEREBY RECALL PW1 & PW6 FOR FURTHER CROSS

I  ....E'XAMINATION.

THIS CRL.RP IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE

COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

/

2;/'



ORDER

Learned Counsel for the revision petitiV_on.er-has filed,

a memo dated 11.04.2010 seeking :c’_::onfJ’e’*rsi’1oAn~:.o’f-Criminal
Revision Petition into CriminalaPeti4ti’o_n;~- C C V C C

2. The memo is takén::on_ memo
reads as follows: it it V

“The counsel ‘appe_aring”~for-the-~ petitioner
submits i_:ria__l: the’V’p”etit:ione.r=-has? filed the above
Criminal’ Re.v’isio.n E36.-titio’nAV’b«efo_re this Hon’ble
Court-; _”F1h,ej. office’-…ha-s -raised an objection
stating .gti1.at is} not maintainable.
Viv-l.enc_:é~,..i_i’t ‘i13:;;_p_ra–yeci_’thatthis Hon’b|e Court be
;v’p|eased,iito c04nv.ert.i_the above Criminal Revision
iéetition ‘as’j”-:’:r’imi’neI’i”-Petition, in the interest of
jiL:stice”.’ ”

In view—-~o’i’ this memo, the revision petitioner is

;3’eTl’i’.’l_il'”.”Ee:_:(.3i :,’to:Vconvert this Criminal Revision Petition into

Ctrilminal’.’V’i5et.i:tion. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision

Petition is disposed of.

sdh
Ind’:-39*