High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri T Shankara Murthy vs State Of Karnataka By Sho Of … on 23 February, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Sri T Shankara Murthy vs State Of Karnataka By Sho Of … on 23 February, 2010
Author: L.Narayana Swamy


_… .. ……………m ruur! wux: or KARNATAKA men COURT or MRNXTKWIKWSIGH c

1

R3 ‘HE EEG}-I C%RT OF WHATM AT

DATED mzs Ti-E 2339 DAY 0? FEBI?UA_E&’ri _

BEFQRE

‘IRE HONBLE MR .

cnnsmmx. ax?


SR1. T. _ _ 
sic: SR1. «:2.      '

A(}Ei3ABCKJT42 YE-Ams” f ..
12:01;

x
BANGA1-€3RE..EAST..TALUK’~«’V’ H »
Bmegmim A

%%%% mnmsflm

(BY SRIK. ABID
sRI;+::, .’NA€§EI’:$fI,1 i’.1C)’i»*:”$;}- L %
STA.»TE.._’Gi?.’. K&_RR.A’I’fi{A

B’! 5110 C1.F’Ki\m?GODI POLICE s’1’A’ImrI

&3A23€§ALoRx’?: _1.3I$’fRICT
é nwEs’I’Ic3A’rI<:31w QFFICER 0? acts
% Ffiaammmz CELL}

Pfilakfifi Ream

-~ 550 091*

mafimsmmgn EYTI-E
.A LERRHEB STATE PUBLIC PRQSECUTGR

V ‘@133 $GiIE?’I” Eummm

‘ §AxGAz.eRE — am am. ,..RE8PQKDER”£”

% f k:3*;[ SR1 vmya KUMAR MMAGE, HCGR}

-..,.,… W mmnmm man count _os KARNATAKA HIGH COURI or KARN£?;9:W

KA i-HGH C

2

Tms £32′-a1MmAL Pmmox man Urmm sgcfxtax
439 012* CQDE 012′ cnmsx. moczmmn
ADVOCA’I’E FOR THE PETITIOHER PRAY1NGa’i’I-IA?

HORBLE comm MAY BE PLEASE!) T0 RELEASE'”THE’»
mmzenme on mm. m c.c.1m.121/201.9. Q11
or mm mn:..cx~m:r .mr»xc:AL MfiG3S’TFfA’I?;, ; %

Bmcmmas premier. BAIHGALQRETT, ‘ $9.3

GFFEHCE P/U/S. ma}, 304:9; 12612/wj%s~Ecs.%3%.»§*a%Nn% L

6 (‘3? D.P.AC’!’.

THIS F’E’I’ITION c01«mI<3::§:§ FORV"C§i'§:V1:)fiR$f; 0:: ms

BAY, THE CQJRT 'ITIE'F'GLLC3'3?'RWG: '

dfised" gr; I113 has
__ at Kadugwi patina
stafian mmmmt by her husband

V jfi. hem rwktmvd by rim

cam Ha.23;4r[1993 for mam purziahabia
am of an rm. § is: was noticad
" mfimw gm Wm: the juriasdictsifin at' fiw
palicae station. I~i'aw@e§ iznrvasfigafian was

\

.. .. …………..M ruufl t…uuK'r or KARNATAKA ms:-I counf"5FW:E4K"ki§Af;:\m may .1:

3

3::-n:m£m’red tn Kadugndi Police Sta&n afi the

mnmred in mm Na.151;1m3 for
uma fiwtion 394-2 afthe we and the y

tethsA.C.M,M.Banfl1-ecity, ‘

3.; It *3 submitted by am

from the year 1999 cf December
1999, the m;m y§’as Bmmm
Dktrict. waa not hsued with

any use,’

4. 4sf§.’1b%’ wamsel ibr the petitionw:

that or the mam have mt
much we under Section 3, 4, 15 cf

Act. ‘rm pafifiionw has get yawn up

theyareta B-afghan
_ tkw mafia is km for East mm mm a dwacfie
% géaefitsmm mum mt be biaxmg a my mpg-as committed hy

K

.. -…,… \ll’ ~..mmp.m rub’!-I coma! or KARNATAKA i-I!GI~; COURI or: xARNArAk;W§asc&a c

5. The Ewzfi Goverwgxt “:3;ét ”

aince fium tk date of tIi:e..__ofi’e ‘z*.gé

abaeonding and mat year
1994. The pafice the yam: 1994
abamndhxg was arrwted and
rmgndw %%%% cmmmm, 5;: is
5; an the part at’ the pofice

chfigfufga-shfit beam prepared an the basis of
farm-. Hmce, it is submitmd m raw’ 1:
&

V ‘A j é.” Emmi the zmpecfiw smuxmel and on the
A mxlmissiezi ef bath tbs mrflm, I have gone
mmw waved m mré’

\

-. ……….. ….w. \..\JUl(! ur mxmmcn HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA..!.;iwl&;i;Mw'”

Cl

5

7. It is no «fiaubt, firm csfibzxce has 20331

2§.{3′?’.1%3. The ofibnoes are very
my unxim’ scenaon +93-A am: r
Linda’ Secfion 3, 4 and 6 af the L %
fact mm that was hc “had %

1993, rm firm Invehagn It is
made clear in the cane was
mgnzw-ad in and th&1’mfhm’
was Static-n and action was

3. tbme saezm ta be a

irrvfitfwizaian, ‘rm is a pemfiar
is a delay cf more than a dmde.

piawfi. befare thus mutt that

V awcvaxflirg axd falzrtw sz1fic2%’ flew
‘ A , mafia fie nab rm peti§.e:rm°; alimiigzn such as
wamm was abammaag cazzzmt be beam . Dapifie

°\