High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Sudhindra Ramarao Hirenarti vs Sri Vishwanath Avadhabihari … on 27 May, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri Sudhindra Ramarao Hirenarti vs Sri Vishwanath Avadhabihari … on 27 May, 2008
Author: H N Das
_s1=e1 WSHWANATH' m;fADH;aBzHAR; MISHRA
 SiNCE.E.I"3'EQEASAED REPBY HIS LEGAL HEIRS
'v.SAT*x'ANAR¥'AA.Nr'£S/O VISHWANATH NBSHRA

4'?.C&3:'iV_"f--'}{'E PETITIONER PRAWNG THAT THIS HONBLE
 MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE EN'l'lK2:}
E EPROEEEQINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF' THE

E  "'C.C.NO.278/ 2002 AGJHNSI' THE ACCUSED 'THE PRESENT'

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALOREZ"--.._
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MAY 2003  'f ~
BEFORE  ]: jg    A    é

THE HONBLE Mr. JUSTICE H N gzaczxmogfifii   E' Q'

CRL.P.NO.5 174 OF' E * 

sm SUIDHINDRA RAMAR;é:)"'~z»iIRfEN.§R*i*1__E.:"«.M

S/C) RAMA RAG H1RENA1:2'I'1'   _ . 
MAJOR R/A BANAsHANxAR;_mcsAR  " 

KELAGAVE ROAD, ¢_r.)1--mR\.xfm 5-,   Q
E 1 E   QPEETITIONER

(By Sri: M;  ;:t}'...r:.:)' " 

A€}E'{)£'xBG¥.§'¥" 5'8.__Y'EARS, :=z;AT LANE BAZAAR
DH»%R'N+"'«i9'  

 RESPONDENT

  ;Cf?.L.P FILED U/3.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE

'PRL. C.J(JR. DN .} 55 F'RL.JMFC3, DHARWAD IN

}'E'l'1'I'l()N ER.

d4,\,...,

 



This Criminal Petition coming on for admission 

day, the court made the following:

ORDER

In this petition, the petitionezfimhas p it it

quashing the entire proceedings

pending on the file of PrI.JMFC, DhaI__w*ad;” V

2. Deceased V “~ itisixzvaiiath
Avadhabihari Mishra fiied _t_p:-ivaie complaint
under Section 209 for the
offences a}}eged€.to:”h;n’;e: Section 138
of Negotiabv1e..ins’i1iinients Court remstered
the pzivuantei’eon1p}eint ‘deceased complainant in

C.C.No.278/ thependency of the proceedings

iqefoxe Trial fthepirespondent died and thereafter

representatives were brought on record. Now the

legal ._ of deceased complainant are

ivprosecliting proceedings. At this stage, the petitioner

W stsaceused before the Trial Court has med this petition

r_ the entire proceedings.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends

that all the legal representatives of deceased complain” ant

V was not brought on record before the Trial Court and on

complainant in his complaint, there is no need for fnesh

averments. i find no justifiable grounds to interfere

the proceedings before the Trial Court at this stage 5

Section 482 of CR1′-‘C.

For the reasons stated above, i$”fi§:’$b3€ ” A T

rejected Without reference to respoi1c?,§,fi3.f._,

Dmr % 7