Smt. H K Kavyashree W/O. Lingaraj vs Majigi Nagaraj S/O. Shekhappa
2022 Latest Caselaw 1979 Kant

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   DHARWAD BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                       PRESENT

 THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

                         AND

         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RACHAIAH

         CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100042/2021


BETWEEN:
SMT.H.K.KAVYASHREE W/O LINGARAJ,
D/O K.YERISWAMY,
AGE 38 YEARS,
NEAR SHRI MOOK DURGAMMA TEMPLE,
BASAPUR AREA, HANUMANHALLI VILLAGE,
MARIAMMANHALLI, TALUK: HOSPETH,
DIST: BELLARY - 583 101.
                                        ..... APPELLANT

(BY SRI.DATTATRAYA TIMMANNA HEBBAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     SHRI.MAJIGI NAGARAJ S/O SHEKHAPPA
       AGE : 28 YEARS, OCC : CONTRACTOR,
       R/O HANUMANHALLI VILLAGE,
       HOSPET TALUKA OF BELLARY DISTRICT.

2.     THE STATE BY DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
       HOSPETE SUB DIVISION, TOWN POLICE STATION,
       HOSPET, DIST : BELLARY
       REPRESENTED BY HCGP,
                                          Crl.A.No.100042/2021
                              2


      HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
      DHARWAD.
                                         ..... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.V.M.BANAKAR, ADDL.S.P.P. FOR R2
R1 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

     THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
378(4) OF CR.P.C SEEKING TO GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL
PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SPECIAL
JUDGE, BELLARY DATED 25.08.2020 AND SET ASIDE THE
ORDER OF ACQUITTAL AGAINST RESPONDENT NO.1 U/S
363, 365, 366, 341, 344, 376(N), 323, 504, 506(2) OF
INDIAN PENAL CODE AND UNDER SECTION 3(x), (xi), (v) OF
SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBE (PREVENTION OF
ATROCITES ACT), 1989 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH
PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY,
DR. H. B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY, J., MADE THE
FOLLOWING:

                           ORDER

Learned proxy counsel for the appellant appearing

through video conference expresses his inability to comply

the outstanding office objections.

A perusal of the order sheet go to show that not less

than four opportunities were granted to comply with the

office objections, despite which, the learned counsel for Crl.A.No.100042/2021

appellant did not comply the office objections. Since he has

not complied the office objections and expressed his inability

for non compliance of office objections, the appeal stands

dismissed for non-compliance of office objections.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

Naa