High Court Karnataka High Court

State Of Karnataka vs Venkatesh @ Kiran on 10 March, 2010

Karnataka High Court
State Of Karnataka vs Venkatesh @ Kiran on 10 March, 2010
Author: L.Narayana Swamy
Q
E
3
§
as
3
§
3
E
2
%
§

\;mt"mn:'a..m

wwmws w Mww mwwm ,.'$J§"" mmmwfimflma MEGH {;;mm§%;"%"' mil?

1

IN mm mm: coum 0? KARNATAKA AT  RE

marrgn mzs THE 10:1: DAY 012*   T  &  

BEFORE:

THE HQNBLE rem .JUSTiGE L;I¢ARA'¥t1:¢:%g$3$(g31sai'  g

cnzwzmn APrEAL%zét;%§1é9 0? '~2:: o?i

 

3tai:eofKan:ata.1r,_..§I;:y   % 
The      

[By     %

éfls

, %Vwm§-sh%@ Kééankg 
»abaut.:é1%Vj;*ears§

Féasflirlg gm, .¥i'aj.t:'~'..3'2i»3 ,

RESPGNDEHT

  : THIS CREAL APPERL KQLED Ufilififi SECTIQR'
T ._ 3'-?E[1} & (2) Q?' CQDE GF CRB1flAL PRCJCSEDURE, BY
  $'I'A'IE RP. FOR THE STAJIE PRAYEWG THAT' THIS
" AHGWBLE COURT' MAY BE PLEASED TC} GRANT LEAVE

'K

E



aw-'mmvwm xx' 2%

"Ma; wwvwwm _9!w&'}i" wmmwmammm mlww mmmm" U?' mmmpamma Mifirfl flfiiéfif £7}? K&%R.&?5a.%(& kéfififi €Z?€M.§%"§%§5 mmmmm imfifiw QQUQ

2

T0 mm AH Amar. mama? THE: 

zsmxzm msszn BY THE Ems? ABnma3naLA%}%¢;fN3L
JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION), cJM., MYfl3QREY.m  C'.€.«"t--. 
210.270/06 Arm Acczumma  FESPQBJDENT I  L

ACCUSEID ma THE GFFEHCE  mxxsmafiagzrnpm
SEC'I'IC}E379OFIF'C.   _ 

'zms APPEAL cozsmémi fag  

my, THE coum' Dzuvskaraqf;-E FC}Li1CWI.";NG;:

   

flo.270l    Civil Judge
Cmrt by i*£aa asr§e.&'   jfj'%;.%5m.2o:35 has mam the

  «  mes; is prezfirred by the sum
'  v::r§?adeam?rEtanaecusec}; andwbemma mm has
%%   & § fl has mt bean ammama w the

 aamzagamgmmarmwzhemm

'*



MEQH CQEfl?"0$ xmmmm §"§%€2"-pH %W%' G? amwfixwm HEQH COQR1

   - 

-wswwmvmm ‘b..c&’¥£ mxM.%fiWMnMmM WQWW ‘§m&J9»fi3’£3’i9~»3’¥_”” iwefififlflwfififil.

3

3. It E use at’ the praawutiaon that on
2.30 p.111. :1 camplamt Ins

alhwzg that his motor which whiézh wfaé

his house has been area.

same: Ins been m £9}: oflhnee
punfislmhk: max Penal Code.

4. On it :§::ompla.1nnn’ 1: has
been that ainxxs he lost
the vvahitLfEe,._ in fim.-at of En house mu.

3A+.O6.2fl;– and tha mm baa hm:

chm. Am a gap at’ mm xmntha, he

% mfi from police gtafimn that his but

% * M foam}. rrmaam, he Wmt to the station

— idazifified 11$ mm 2.

5; m mm Cmzmel submfiaw that an the basis

wh1ma1jrs’mt oftm , a rmw Ems

f

mm ur mmamm mcm couxro:~=.I<AnNAmxA E-HG!-I COURT or KARNATAKA I-us:-I COURT or KARNATAKA men couxr or XARNATAKA E-HG!-I count

4

been mtie fitxm the hmme of FWMZ. W152 who his
mrbdmme and species that the: aecuwd has p£ed.gH§:«:i’:

mum M Rs.5,6G€}]–. He fiart}:m’ 1d;mt1fi’ ‘
WI-3 who 53 the spot pamh aha

5. It B submm that t:mug2; ::m

prmad the case, the mm ;§1mE’ei}.~:wad _” the Trial
Comm, Hm, it in fl$éL_judg¢::nae¢1t

‘2. ~h gg;a~d%¢¢2$;o2.2mo am. for the
aalm of ‘ii: was posted ywmday.

the fret? mmmed absent.

‘l’11yagaraj, Ad’w13a k apminmd

” s ‘in the plaza ofthg mama}; £3: ms aoamaei

awed with 3. mg? of tin paagma. The
‘ aubmified that m gudgammt 333% {km meta’

. ‘ by the T1°£a1 Court may be aetmsidea

‘\

KARNATAICA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA I-i!GH COURT

QUE’? OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURTA;0¥t”‘_3{ARNATAi(A H¥Gvl~l COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR? OF

9. ‘firm Trial Court found wntradtmien .ji:’.:–1_ tm
stahewzt of1~”‘i?v’—2 and aka his midi in

made on 29.03.2006. In his stat-amt ha

the stnhaxx vehicle has been sold

same in his evidmrxce as tlxzgfiitéléeri _
was plfiged fiar Rs.5,GO{)[- ‘ ‘ ry

statwxm mete by flag disbesfievw. the
evid¢:t.7ac:.e cf

If}. It acfian an the mm: cf
firm V is an er-rcr eomm.’tta:I

in *”nt, for the reason that whm

the msmim ef FW-2, he scam

that ‘E1115 vehicie was mid to him

an his evidmm he has aamaa
O O pbdged the mm mm fir Ra.5§BCQf-«,

f
1
7,