Karnataka v. (BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K., HCGP)
Case at a glance
Outcome
Withdrawn
Petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 397, 419
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- JUDGE LDC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2083 OF 2024 BETWEEN:
1. SRI RASHIL PASHA Q @ RAHIL S/O QURRAM PASHA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.2/1-1, 10TH CROSS, VINOBHANAGAR, K. G. HALLI, BANGALORE 560045.
2. SRI USMAN KHAN S/O ASLAM KHAN, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.513, 3RD MAIN, 5TH CROSS, PILLANNA GARDEN, 3RD STAGE, K. G. HALLI, BANGALORE 560045 (BY SRI. MAHESH S., ADVOCATE) AND: Digitally signed by GAYATHRI P G Location: High Court of Karnataka …PETITIONERS
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PEENYA POLICE STATION, REP BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE 01 (BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K., HCGP) …RESPONDENT - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:15412 CRL.P No. 2083 of 2024 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 439 CR.PC PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT PEENYA POLICE STATION TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN CR.NO.505/2023 FOR OFFENCE P/U/S 397 AND 419 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE 31ST ADDL. CMM COURT, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE CITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER The petitioners' counsel has filed a memo seeking withdrawal of the petition with a liberty to file a petition before the Sessions Court, in view of the filing of the charge sheet.
Memo is placed on record.
Liberty sought is granted.
Operative part
Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- JUDGE LDC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 397, 419.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.