Karnataka High Court
Sri Vikranth @ Vicky vs State Of Karnataka on 2 April, 2008
1% was HIGH swam? as xakmawaxa, aamaabmnx mawxn THEE was QWHVRRY my Aral; zaas msraas THE fiBN'ELE MR.JwsTIcE Jfi,3NAfi3R *3~ Crl.?. wm.1ma4i2éQa;~.3 Ezrwzsm V 333 EKKRRETH 3 VICKY, 3K3 fiRTE fiflflflfifi KRQ, AEEE Anna? 39 vmnxa, _ RWR? fl??. ERKMEL H1§H scaama, MQGflRhAPAbYR, vxaaymmaaan, V I ,1 ',;_ ;a_> aauaaaana -- 5fi%'@?$+ 3 g V? " °.T.+--& yawzwzawzn £BY'fiI §uFAL"s:méH§;33¥;?§» }'" $32 $mAmE flf K"R&R§$&A]E%""" Gxfllfifififik Fflhififi 3TATI$&y" ~~* RESQGNDENT v_§BY 3Ei_fimmmAP§A;wa¢§F§ »_ '=Tasg :aa§;a_s, FXLEE uxs $39 aa.§.c. anvxma H3fV?fiES"fifiN*§E$ CGHR? may BE FBERSEE Ta RE&E&$E wan *gw:@:aN$a* mm amxa Em and wa.13x6e my * -v@IR1fiAaAR_§s;,"aM THE FIbK aw THE :: Afiflb. CHM, Rflflfiflfififlfig wfilfifi ES REGISTEREB FGR. THE QFFEfiCE __n__£QfiI$HAfi&E; mmnsm swcmxmma Eéfl, 147, mas, 34:, *«j$33¢;&Q?*%xw'$Ec. 149 my xyc. V": *§"'"§:3'iIE E"§3'§'I'i'ZIZQN CC5§»3T.f'§5S QN FQF; C3RI'.1fiER$ 'F"£r'I3LS HEY, V "TfiE EQURT MADE THE Fwuaawxmmzw 512::-mfiideting backgrmanm éitf s:sa::.':11m~esm:sa6; and allegmtiwnm againat patitimnerg E am 0f View at that ataga, theta is mm pzima faaia aaaé; agaimax patitiamwx fax %%E"mff&nc3 pun;gh&g;§_L , under Sawtimn 3%? afi E33. 3* haawrfiinglyg gatition i3Va¢¢eQte§; '. ?atitimner 13 Ealaa3afi. %n bfiii '3ufijé$£""t¢ fmllawimg a¢fiditian$:~, 1.
Tha gatitisnafigfihaiiyexfimqfifi band far a
sgfi”fi£_$%;£§€§§$fau%fifi ahall wffer tww
3gre§i3# f£@rfi t§e like sum ta the
.V fléfififaafiifin fig aammittal cwurt.
‘;;'{JTha«§a£it£&§ar ahali net tamgar with as
‘ ‘. §fifi§§i§ata gxaaaaufiiwn witnaasaa.
.’ §L T%é-kfietitiwner ahall regularly attand
‘.tn$§e Ccurt.
sa/-gm
Iudge
3’7»?