✦ Karnataka High Court · 17 Nov 2011

State of Karnataka v. Rangappa Tulasappa Dassa.r

Case Details Karnataka High Court · 17 Nov 2011
Court
Karnataka High Court
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No. 2706 of 2009
Decided
17 Nov 2011
Bench
RAVI MALIMATH
Length
2,128 words

Summary

A structured summary for this judgment hasn’t been prepared yet. The full text is below.

Draft using this judgment

Precedent status

No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.

Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.

Related cases why they’re linked — not procedural history

Why is this linked?

Original judgment text

Judgment

1 . 3 3 ) ) l C D C D C . ) l C D C D C D C ) l C i r L C i 1 ) 1 ( ) C ) C D C ) C c ) C D C r i ) C I ( ) l C D C . . o ) C ) / C + r ) l C ) C L C D C < r D C * r D C j P J 1 $ D C ç ) ‘ C D C D C ç D C D C D C ) C C . . . ) C l C D C B 2 , J ) I ) C ‘ F r y ) ’ f . . ) C C i I r m l C D C ( ) C D C - D C D C L C D C D C D C o C ) ) C C D C D C D C D C ) C D C ) C l C D C ) r C r D C D C ) C t r C < D C ) C o C Di C ) C o C D C Dr C ) — C D C ) .ZC C ) ) C D C ) C D C D C D C ) C C < D C ) C C ) ) ) C C C I ( o C ) C q j c C C C D C o C ) C ) C ) C D C D C + r D C D C ) C D C ) C o C ) ) ) C C C ) C D C ) ) C C l D C ) C ) C C D C D C ) C — , r D C r ) C 0 D C ) ) C C D C ) ) ) C C C o 0 D C D C o C ) D C r e ) C C < D C l 0 D C C o C D C D C D C ) C ) ) i C C ) C D C l C i D C ) ) C . . .

D C D C l f ) C C C C . D C ) 2 V ) C D C D C , a “ - D C r D C 9 X D C a ) C ) C ) C * r D C ’ v r D C ) C “ ) I S D C ) C D C D C . D C 9 D C D C r ) C D C D C D C ) C D C ) C D C ) C 4 — j * r D C ) C 9 ) C ) C o C . D C Q C I o C 9 ) C ± r D C D C o C ) C C C C l C r ) * ç D C 9 D C D C . i B ) C D C o C D C ) C 9 3 T j D ÷ C D C ) C i ) ) C ) C D C ) C ) . C ) C g ) C D C ) C o C * r ) C c ) C r - h o C D C D C h — ) C ) C D C D C ) C l C D C o C r ) C C l D C C ) C D C . r 9 D C r D C g o C D C o C m l C C D C l D C C o C i ) . o C + r D C C . D C D C 3 D C ) C ) C D C — r i . o C + 9 r T C < r 1 : r t b o C D C ) C i : D C ) C E o C i j . C < n r . . . s : C r D C :8: 10.

Since the trial Court is justified in acquitting the accused and as the view taken by the trial Court is one of the possible view which can be arrived at from the material on record we decline to interfere with the conclusions reached by the trial Court. Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same stands dismissed. t*sd/e JUDGE Sd/ JUDGE Rsk/

Find similar cases Start drafting free
This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Karnataka High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Criminal Appeal No. 2706 of 2009). ← Search more judgments