Karnataka High Court
Smt Rukmini Laxman Jadhav vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 January, 2024
Author: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:858
WP No. 104674 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO. 104674 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. RUKMINI LAXMAN JADHAV,
AGE. 81 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
R/O.6/405, GANESH NAGAR, GALLI NO. 4,
NEAT PETROL PUMP, SHAHAPUR ICHALKARNAJI,
KOLHAPUR, MAHARASHTRA-416115.
2. SHRI. SANJAY LAXMAN JADHAV,
AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O.6/405, GANESH NAGAR, GALLI, NO. 4,
NEAT PETROL PUMP, SHAHAPUR, INCHALKARNJI,
KOLHAPUR, MAHARASHTRA-416115.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. VITTHAL S. TELI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
MANJANNA R/BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
E DEPARTMENT REVENUE, M.S. BULDING,
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
Digitally signed
by MANJANNA E BENGALURU-560001.
Date: 2024.01.17
16:57:35 +0530
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BELAGAVI,
D.C. COMPOUND, BELAGAVI-590001.
3. THE TAHASILDAR, ATHANI,
TAHASILDAR OFFICE COMPOUND,
ATHANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591304.
4. THE CIRCLE POLICE INSPECTOR,
ILKA POLICE STATION, ILKA, TAL. ILKA,
DIST. BAGALKOT-587125.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. BHOJEGOUDA T. KOLLER, AGA)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:858
WP No. 104674 of 2023
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRYAING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT QUASHING THE ORDER OF
PROCLAMATION AD ATTACHMENT ISSUED UNDER SECTION 82 AND
83 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973 DATED 07/03/1998
AND ALL CONSEQUENTLY ORDERS IN CC NO.524/1997 VIDE
ANNEXURE-"C" AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. The petitioners are challenging an order dated
7.03.1998 passed in CC.No.524/1997, by which a
proclamation was issued against accused Nos.2 to 4
therein i.e. Ragunath alias Sudhakar Bapu, Sopana alias
Satish Kulekar, Sunil Lakshman Jadav and Shankagowda
Tippanna Rangannavar.
2. The petitioners are the mother and brother of
Sunil Lakshman Jadav, the 3rd accused therein.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that the criminal case which had been registered against
the four accused was ended in an acquittal by judgment
NC: 2024:KHC-D:858
dated 7 April 2001. It is also stated that the case as
against the third accused, who is the predecessor in
interest of the petitioners, was split up.
4. It is also submitted that the third accused i.e.
Sunil Lakshman Jadav passed away on 20th March 2003
and his death is also registered in the Register of Births'
and Deaths' and a copy of the death extract is also
produced as Annexure-F.
5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for
the petitioners that despite the order of acquittal and
despite the fact that the third accused-Sunil Lakshman
Jadav had expired, the authorities have continued the
order of attachment issued on 7.3.1998.
6. In my view, since the entire criminal
proceedings have ended in an acquittal and the third
accused has also expired in the year 2003, it is obvious
that the order of attachment would stand dissolved.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:858
Consequently, it is clarified that the order of attachment
made pursuant to the order dated 7.3.1998 no longer
subsists.
Sd/-
JUDGE
VB
CT:BCK
