SOFI v. THE STATE
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Hence, the Criminal Petition is dismissed for non-
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 149
Judgment
Operative part
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200632 OF 2022 BETWEEN: SOFI S/O BASHAPPA @ BASHUMIYA NALADOUR, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: HEMNOOR VILLAGE, TQ: SHORAPUR, DIST: YADGIRI-585 220. (BY SRI. S.B.SANGOLAGI., ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) …PETITIONER AND: THE STATE THROUGH SHORAPUR POLICE STATION, TQ: SHORAPUR, DIST: YADGIRI, (REPRESENTED BY ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT KALABURAGI-585 105). …RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 438 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.198/2018 OF SHORAPUR POLICE STATION, TQ: SHORAPUR, DIST: YADGIRI, PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C. SURPUR IN C.C.NO.323/2019 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 427, 353, 379, 511, 307, 332 R/W SEC.149 OF I.P.C. AND U/SEC. 21(3), 21(4), 22 OF MMDR ACT, 1957. PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:6344 CRL.P No. 200632 of 2022 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING SITTING AT DHARWAD BENCH, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER When the matter is called, the petitioner is not represented. When the matter is listed and called out, the advocate must be present. The absence may affect the case. As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the petition was listed on 07.08.2024, on that day, though matter called twice, there was no representation on behalf of petitioner. Hence, the petition was ordered to be listed on 28.08.2024. The petition is listed today. As could be seen from the petition papers, the petition is filed in the year 2022. Now we are in the month of August 2024. The petition is pending for almost two years. As already noted above, when the matter is called, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is not diligent in prosecuting the petition. Hence, the Criminal Petition is dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP LIST NO.: 19 SL NO.: 1
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Hence, the Criminal Petition is dismissed for non-
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 149.
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.