{"id":70970,"date":"2010-10-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010"},"modified":"2018-07-27T14:38:22","modified_gmt":"2018-07-27T09:08:22","slug":"state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"State Of Karnataka vs Tailor Manjunatha @ Manjunatha … on 23 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
State Of Karnataka vs Tailor Manjunatha @ Manjunatha … on 23 October, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao B.V.Pinto<\/div>\n
 \n\nI\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGAE:jaE--V0:..\n\nDATED THIS THE 23RI> DAY OF OC'I'{)BER--;-,.':E:Z.01.(:):'   -E '\n\nPRESENT   \n\nTHE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE }{=;SREEbHAa\":zAQ\"  '\n\nTHE HON'BLE__1\\\/IR. JuSfi'f:cEVV13.V. i\ufb01rmfe \n\nCRL.A.V  .2 13 (3F\"2\u00a3}03\n\nBE'I'WEEN:--  V   '\nState of   .  \nBy Chelur P(\")1ice_;'----. V  \" \n\n     \u00ab. &  Appellant\n{By 811' RM\"; lxigigaz, ';\u00a7~';1ddI;--.SPP) \n\nAND:--\n\nTailor ManJ:L01nVathdaV'@ 1\\A\/iai1jt\u00e9~i1atha Reddy,\nS\/0. Gangaredd-ya, V \" '0 '\n\n \n\nV'Yega\\,-grnettaggntapalt};N 0\n\nV7  B:;1gepVa1!i_ Taiuk} ._ _\n\n    V  Respondent<\/pre>\n
(B3,: Sri S. ShLa111:\u00ab-iarappa 8: ASStS., Advocate]<\/p>\n
 C\u00a3i.A. is filed U\/s.3’78(1] & (3) of Cr.P.C. by the<\/p>\n
 JState P.P’V;*:1\u00b0or the State praying that this Hoxfble Court may<\/p>\n
TV.”1t)AAeE_p1:’Ae;ased to grant leave to file an appeal against the
\n Jtigdgment and Order of acquittal dated 05.08.2005 passed
\n “by the Pr1.S.J., Kolar in S.C.N0.\u00a380\/2004 acquitting the
\n Resp0ndent–Aceused for the offences punishable U\/s.4i~98–A,<\/p>\n
vs<\/p>\n
‘}
\nA<\/p>\n
304~B of IPC and Sec.4~ of DP. Act. The AppeIIa:rit~’\u00a7ta::te.<<\/p>\n
prays that the above order may be set aside.<\/p>\n
This appea} coming for hearing: on-this 2' <\/p>\n
deiivered the following: ' V
\nJune\ufb01\ufb02\ufb01\ufb01l'<\/p>\n
This appeal is fiied  dated
\n05.08.2005 passed by  Judged; Kolar in
\nS.C.No. 180 \/2004 _acquitti.r.1\u00a7_  70f the offence
\nU\/s.498–A ana21_3o'2;'e:\u00a3;3V    fit" the 9.13. Act.<\/p>\n
2.   revealed from the
\npapers   husband of deceased
\nPramilarhma’;  love with the deceased<\/p>\n
and took her’ “to:’A:3.c1ra”Pradesh and married in some other<\/p>\n
 0′ ”vpIac’e..abo~1.1t 8A.mohths”‘p’rior to her death and returned to the<\/p>\n
  the villagers took the deceased and the<\/p>\n
accused ands: their marriage registered at Sub~Registrar’s<\/p>\n
at\/\/,.,._.u”.office E-atgfepalli on 12.1.2004, thereafter the accused was<\/p>\n
 the deceased in a house got through Ashraya<\/p>\n
 scheme and while so living in the said house the accused<\/p>\n
3<\/span><\/p>\n
was harassing his wife for bringing dowry of .<\/p>\n
to get some lands from her parents, thereby he 1 it<\/p>\n
have committed an offence U\/s.498:–A’ of AIPC   it<\/p>\n
D.P.Act.\n<\/p>\n
3. It is further alleged ttiaatibeing togtotlerate
\nthe i11~treatment and  to ?ra1neela, she
\ncommitted suicide by hangiI:g_Vonf’ about 7 am.
\nin their house  acetisted.  alleged to have
\nCommitted   V<\/p>\n
4:” llll   the prosecution has
\nexaniinedpin all  got marked EXs.P.l to P12<\/p>\n
and Produc’e’cttM.Qs,._1ttOtt4..;~’tiVThe defence of the accused was<\/p>\n
v*,_one totalV_deniai;-Aft.er hearing the prosecution and the<\/p>\n
(iefe11ee,–v._the”learned Sessions Judge was pleased to acquit<\/p>\n
theAt.respond.ent’s1=oi the charges levelled against the accused.<\/p>\n
j The Stated .lf1as.fi1ed this appeal.<\/p>\n
it  The prosecution case is that the father of the<\/p>\n
deeeesed Maddireddy iiled a complaint with the police on<\/p>\n
Hl\u00e9.O5.2O04. It is alleged in the complaint that his second<\/p>\n
F<\/p>\n
Ln<\/p>\n
deceased and the accused were residing <\/p>\n
therefore. charge sheet is filed against the accu’sedVon1j?”‘e V’<\/p>\n
deleting 7 others against whom the a1i’egat1f0n”_:s wereV:.rnade_fbyVi’v..<\/p>\n
the complainant in the complaint.\n<\/p>\n
6. PW1 — Maddireddvdinjthe witness  h–as”‘s’La;ted
\nthat since he was not ingggoodterms  his ‘da.ughter for
\nhaving married against    never visiting
\nhis daughter’s hgotzsve.  \u00abrircsds-examination
\nthat whatever     was heard by
\nhim thrcugh :’not personally come to
\nknow ahvgut tii\u00a2d’a11:e\u00a7aa;:\u00a2ni\u00a7:or ill-d treatment and harassment
\ngiven by   h it<\/p>\n
  PWn2’~{i\\Tarasamma is the wife of PW1. She has<\/p>\n
in  a1so.,vsta,t.;edgreg’arding the demand of the accused for the land<\/p>\n
itvhie’1;g.ifac\u00a7i’*A_ig__ nt)’t’V’.menti0ned in the FIR. PW3– Mohammed<\/p>\n
 _ Khan is..,.’.t.h’e””; signatory to EX.P.3 which is the marriage<\/p>\n
VVg’E\u00a7e.mj_1cate id of the accused with the deceased. PW4 –<\/p>\n
 a._’Na1i’a;)’}&;)areddy stated in his evidence that the accused has<\/p>\n
  -deinanded dowry of Rs.40,000\/– and because the parents of<\/p>\n
deceased could not make payment, the accused<\/p>\n
harassing the deceased. This fact is not  ”<\/p>\n
complaint at all. PW5 — Marappareddy’ \u00bbstate?sHthat.–VLafter’_’_thei’V, <\/p>\n
marriage, the accused and Pramila”=we7r_e”in cordiai <\/p>\n
However in the next breath   the:\n<\/p>\n
deceased Pramila were quarrelihg: _’n1oi1ey and
\nornaments. z i H d<\/p>\n
8. PWS -. V. ivsaraswathil is   lot: the deceased.<\/p>\n
\nShe states  'had quarreled three\ndays    doused with kerosene.\nShe further_    was asked by the accused\n<\/pre>\n
and her dparents’  dowry, therefore they had<\/p>\n
doused ~vthemseEves”with’ kerosene. This version of PW6 does<\/p>\n
. dhot”I’irid’*j::1a6e__in themeyidence of PW} or PW4 or PW7. She<\/p>\n
 further dt’11a’.t the accused and her sister have not asked<\/p>\n
anything.~froir.Lher parents. But her parents at the time of<\/p>\n
ix”~’~___V’~receptio:i__A\u00a7\/oiuntarily said that they would give half acres of<\/p>\n
  y'”laod.a;1d Rs.5000\/~\u00bb and gold ornaments from them.<\/p>\n
\/%<\/p>\n
7<\/span><\/p>\n
9. PW”? — Gujjepalli Venkatarayappa is<\/p>\n
signatory to E3x.P.6 — inquest mahazar’*,’::”   V’<\/p>\n
K.N.Naraya11appa is the Tahsildar w.h0″has   <\/p>\n
inquest mahazar after conducting the  _fjr0eeeddi3ngs7.:<\/p>\n
over the dead body. PW9– Dr:\n<\/p>\n
officer who has stated that  dde as a
\nresult of hanging.  and PW11 —\n<\/p>\n
Venkatasubbareddy are  rnahazar~
\nEx.P.6.   Ex.P.9~\u00bb
\nhouse   \ufb01fespect of the accused
\nresidingrvin: Ramamurthy, PW14 –\n<\/p>\n
Sannathiniinappa=anAdA’PW\u00a5~”‘Hearaje are the police officials<\/p>\n
who h;avec0ndu,cte’d”‘in\\festigation in this case.<\/p>\n
  xdf\ufb02 fiegird sn PM. Nawaz, learned Add}. S.P.P. for<\/p>\n
 S.Shankarappa learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
V dd resp’o.ndei1t..V <\/p>\n
”   It is seen that there is vast discrepancy in the<\/p>\n
—  eimdence of PW} and PW2 regarding the demand for dowry.<\/p>\n
” The sister of the deceased says that the accused has never<\/p>\n
a.\n<\/p>\n
\/2<\/p>\n
demanded anything at the time of marriage. therefore-.:”g:’t,he..<\/p>\n
offence U\/s.4 of the DP. Act is not proved  it<\/p>\n
prosecution.   –\n<\/p>\n
12. So far as charge U\/s.30.#i <\/p>\n
there is no clear evidence to  thattlieglVa.cc’:i.is’ed has
\ndemanded dowry from the deceased.o’r.._her’par.entsi\u00a7 and in
\nthis connection there vyaslit\u00e9ligll.  to the death.
\nUnder these circtimshtancielsl’the  \u00e9ec. 304-13 IPC
\nhave not     the prosecution
\nwitnessesgyl  {I V H  g V ‘I it i V<\/p>\n
 _’  of money and ill treatment
\nis concerriewd\u00e9. the find place in the FIR. The<\/p>\n
information regarciirlg the? ill treatment to the deceased is<\/p>\n
 e\ufb02videnceulas PW1 has categorically stated that<\/p>\n
he  r1ho–t_gh.coVnsVer1ted for the marriage of the deceased with<\/p>\n
the accuSe\u20ac:l_.l’4j)Tl1eref0r\u20ac. after the marriage he never visited<\/p>\n
T3″-‘\u00ab.___V’t.he ho1f1se3of the deceased. Under these circumstances, the<\/p>\n
  “eyiden\u00e9ce regarding the ill treatment or harassment and<\/p>\n
consequent demand for dowry is not proved beyond<\/p>\n
reasonable doubt. We are of the opinion that the learned<\/p>\n
Sessions Judge has properly appreciated the evidence on”7<\/p>\n
record and has come to the correct eonclusion;.\u00bbAAW.e’ doflnot” ”<\/p>\n
find any good reason to interfere with the orderyof <\/p>\n
passed by the learned Session Judge  thisA’a1::>peal   <\/p>\n
liable to be dismissed. Accordingly,  appe_alfis_dis_;nissed..  <\/p>\n
Gps*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court State Of Karnataka vs Tailor Manjunatha @ Manjunatha … on 23 October, 2010 Author: K.Sreedhar Rao B.V.Pinto I IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGAE:jaE–V0:.. DATED THIS THE 23RI> DAY OF OC’I'{)BER–;-,.’:E:Z.01.(:):’ -E ‘ PRESENT THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE }{=;SREEbHAa”:zAQ” ‘ THE HON’BLE__1\\\/IR. JuSfi’f:cEVV13.V. i\ufb01rmfe CRL.A.V .2 13 (3F”2\u00a3}03 BE’I’WEEN:– V […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-70970","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nState Of Karnataka vs Tailor Manjunatha @ Manjunatha ... on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Karnataka vs Tailor Manjunatha @ Manjunatha ... on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-27T09:08:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Karnataka vs Tailor Manjunatha @ Manjunatha … on 23 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-27T09:08:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1121,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010\",\"name\":\"State Of Karnataka vs Tailor Manjunatha @ Manjunatha ... on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-27T09:08:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Karnataka vs Tailor Manjunatha @ Manjunatha … on 23 October, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"State Of Karnataka vs Tailor Manjunatha @ Manjunatha ... on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Karnataka vs Tailor Manjunatha @ Manjunatha ... on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-27T09:08:22+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Karnataka vs Tailor Manjunatha @ Manjunatha … on 23 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-27T09:08:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010"},"wordCount":1121,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010","name":"State Of Karnataka vs Tailor Manjunatha @ Manjunatha ... on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-27T09:08:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-karnataka-vs-tailor-manjunatha-manjunatha-on-23-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Karnataka vs Tailor Manjunatha @ Manjunatha … on 23 October, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/70970","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=70970"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/70970\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=70970"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=70970"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=70970"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}