Karnataka High Court
Sri Y Sampangi vs State Of Karnataka on 24 November, 2011
"a B&ngal@£a¢ IE THE azag @033? Q? KARNEAKA Ar 3Aa@AL®RE %%%mW»5 3A?g§ THIS THE 24" say my xavxmggmf 291114 BE§®RE THE gamfsng Mz. §USTI$E §,v; §:$%a'fY CRIMENAL §E?z?I0N NC €3é§g2a1:'- ' BETfiEEH:
Y.Sampangi sfm Ye1lappag 4% years, MLA, KG? Assemhiy,'% Constituency, R§at_N¢,72,_V ._ _ Ambedkar Colony, H$nga$$nfir§g Eagur Main Road, 3abgs;¢i§«*." §ETE?I8NER {By $ri$Asfipi'R&rnahéli§; S:W;€@uns9l for $xi,K§Raghg§ath§}{ 3N3: .... H Stage af K§£fiafiak§&;W' Rfby ;ts--Add;flfDiz§C%¢r General,§f_§@licé, j Kagnataka Lokayuktha Eglicag fiufiningham Ragfi, E£SP@§§Efi?
: .§Egf$é§Q¢$t@ Sri.Eeiiia§§a fa:
S$i9$,$,Rajendra Refifiy} x,,x*,fhiS Eétitiéfi is fiiefi under Sec 4%? 9f f:¢§ Q, $3 aiiaw this §gtition anfi a§n$g§$enti§ . -ftzgn§§@r tha S§1.£C fig :§§f§§ genfiing $2 tka "xufiiie $f thg 3332: Eddie $5 amé $%$si@n$ guéga &
2 Q'?
_w§&& fiufiga, ?:avant:§m 9% Carrugtzfim Ecz, y» is concerned, that the bzethar Qf tha Prasiding §fficer has fieclared that he is ingtrumentai in senfiing the petitianer ta fiaii is gupyarfied by affidavits cf Que B.M.Ramachan&xaWG% $/Q fiunivenkata§§a Sf Eethamang§fiag §afigar§§t faigi, In his affidavit Sri.Ramacfiafidra kgé" 3§afiré& that he is a activisfi » of ".fiaria¢$ "vdalitV organisations in Ea§ham$fig#ié:= IfiH°céfinection with. these 9xganiz§%ifi§§f:h§_Lg§§$ jtc Bangarget frequently anfi fie %§§§$¥M%p$ad%@n%th brcther of the Loka§fi§fiar"$u§§§g w§§ Lis' a resident of 3angar§é£"§§§ QE g gfiémé ééndcr by §rafe$siQm¢ It is .%§érr§§@ i#m §hé fiaid affiéavit by Mr¢Ram§chafiflra aha: fié angages Mx.Eadrinafih ta x fi£affi'tbgvdeed$"Whenevar it is necessary, It is ai$é '$fi§té§4 by him, that firsgafirinath. is $15G idéfifiified }by paliticai Qrganizatiang by M ., §arti¢ip£tim§ Qangzass yarty zaliiag and '§§a§§§g$. Et :3 further avezred by him that $3 V* I 2§§:§.2§1: ha wamt is mgét Mr Sadrimath fax %&%%&@m;;HH.
3! political activities by identifying himself with Y.Sampangi; Mfla. It i5 avarred by him that h& goefi ts Bangazpet very" Qften. to 'vigit vazicua Qavernment Gfficeg in aennectionb withf "his cantract wark, Be alsfi statefi. thafi: hé §fi§wSW Mr.Eadrinath; brother af th¢"Eak&y§k§fi"§u&gé,én§ he visits $ub*Registraf5%' $ffié§ €%§ Héftenv MrwBadrinath is a §§$idé#%t§fi %&ngar§ét and is a stampwvendar by §rQ§¢é$é@$§ ?¢$§@éiwayS entrust the drafting $f §é¢d$kt6fi%fi:§a§£inath. It is further a¥%§#§$w$¥:%§§§'%$§%é$dra Mouni that an
29.i9,é§i§ fig %@§i§k%Ba$g£Aath for aeeking hig assistéh§@§;{J§%Q5u%i$g' certain. fiscmments fxom the gabwRé§i$t£§g?g éffice, it ig Stated by fiim '"taag agx;ng tha£'§;me "" Mr,Eafirinath has tolé him t§at héx§fi%¢§a§rinath} has afivisefi his brather, thé¢;@aXn§fi Jufiga, ta fiance; the bail granaéfi ta zu" MZ»$§§?§@§i, E: is avarrefi =that firxgafirinaih ". &g§_:f§rthe§ gtataé that fie has aévisefi big R"»u§:§th§:' to fienvict Sampamgi 3% that Eamyangi § $Q 25 Therefore; it is net ag if the petitianer was taken hy surprgse an 28.:§¢2Qil an ghimfi date the caurt decided fig gancel the baigq §Q§a of Qriminal ?z@cedure daes fiat _§:e$§rihe that"
befaxe aancellatian. $5 béél ~n$t£5é hag a$§['b@ givan. Zf any cQn&iti¢x§ c§,5&i1 fig? y;§ia£e§; aaurts are empawered t§:¢%nn§l'%h%L%a%3 withaut notice ta the pa%§yjifi;$$"2i%j*gnly' befare the acaasedj :3 sent t3i §%$§BNE§' %§ Easked» why he shauld no? §§l$a§fi fig §%%§I W§ence; E find ma zeasen §$§5h§%eK'§§%§fifi§fie%V t§ a§§re&and that in§u5ticé w§fii§q&%Kc§§§afi--at the hanés af the §r%§iding fiffifififia §§_fl §a§Qw§éfi_ha§ Egan stataé abave; Z am af the agifiisfi».tfiét ufietiticna:" has mat mafia mat any ' ,Agrcufié'f§r t:§n§far af his saga fzam tha pr§3afit ,;Q§:t. £@fi$%; th@ §§tii:a§ :$ fiazaby rejeataéw §£fl~§ :§:§§si'3§§