in: THE HIGH coumflaiz' KARNATAKA4... -_:_ ..._
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA % 7 * --' % %
DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF gum? 3 _: "
BEFORE
THE HOINPBLE Mi'{..;,fUS'I"1i7v.'I§i"N.ANV!3si*+I1';$f§ 1 'jg
CRIMINAL PE'z'1'r1i§1a1;1_y;:_:, V1536-Q'?
BETWEEN: V _ % 1.
Smt. V31. Ramadevi
w/o. v.v.R.I:,1?rasad _ "
Doc; Managing E):1.te:, Advocate)
~_ Sfafion House Oficer
_.;s.:
Police Station.
'"M.Veerbhadra Rao
8,' 0. M.V.Ratnam
Aged about 28 ycazs
R} o. Movva of Mavva Mandala
Krishna District, AP.
ORDER
The petitioner had filed a complaint under _
Cr.P.C., against respondents 2 to 5, ”
punishable under sections 447′, 379′. 0
468, 469, 471, 417 r/W 34
2. The learned tfxé’ to
Police Sub-Inspector, 156(3)
Cr. P. C. The In,ve§:£ig_;a:t:in;;””(J’fi:i’}~:=rV1″” accused and
they were };efo}03_ released on bail.
Order 01300? would disclose comp}aman’ t
had med a’*– gmtcéf The learned Magistrate posted
the far On 05.01.2001, complainant
V. firaa. the application filed for his cxcmptison was
had remained absent on
0 05.0’10.,2001,-.i5s.02.20o1, 16.03.2001 and 17.04.2001. On
complainant wm absent. The was Wm posted
K « sworn statement of L 011
007.2001, at the request of learned Counsel for
” complainmt, matter was posted for recording sworn
*’ .5
§\;. Q/iflr/”g__/.,,é’x/vi ‘;~… I
statement of complainant It was repeated till
On 26. 1 1.2002, apphacatixrn filed to ezgpt ~» ‘
appearance was rejected and 4’ ‘
nomprosecutien. Against
petition is flied under section 482 H
3. Against order’ non»
prosecution, section 397
Cr. P. 0., mstm-1
that exercise ofpawcrs
necessary to give cfibct to any
V’ to prevent abuse of process of my
to secure the ends of
.j’nnn-_’pmse.cution. Therefore, this pefition does not fall within
__ of section 482 Cr.P.C. The petitions: should
ava1k-;:d’ remedy ava1lsb’ k: to him under section 397
V Cr.P.C. N is
5.v-.fI:1.z case on 11%, compiaint was dhmissed for
mg/LA. (34»”(*&£?/v’ .
6. For these reasons, Pfltition is .’
7. The learned HCGP is to vhf i.
appearance within two Weeks.
SNN Sd/-