Mahadev Yallappa Mannikeri vs The P S I Gokak, on 14 June, 2010

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Mahadev Yallappa Mannikeri vs The P S I Gokak, on 14 June, 2010

Bench: Jawad Rahim

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUET BENCH AT DHARWAD H
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF' JUNE, ii  ii"
BEFORE_»wH "m.i'_i
THE HONBLE MR.JUsTICﬁ=,IAwiioiEA_ié;iii{I   

CRIMINAL PETITI(3._N~.No.75'-46/20 :0, A  

BETWEEN:

Mahadev Yallappa mannikerif, V
Age 28 years, OCC: .Agricu1t'u2=£%.:"'
R/0 Adibatti,    ;_ , 
Tq: Gokak, H   _. , .   j V

Dist: Belgaurri      ' _    PETITIONER

(By Sri. K.'B'.'~N§1:i"}; i.ii}ii'r',";'%.'c"ivoCatCs)
AND: V V 4' V i

The PS1 Go1{;:i;_Ri1r;;1.Pi.'s_." I 
Dist: BC1gaum,i ..  V-

 _R/ by .A3--g;1d1.iiSPP {of E3ta§§;_! _

Circuit Béiish'; 

'V"_D'hE:3VI".Vad.Vv    __ ._ RESPONDENT

(By.$'ii._v.'S.ii€:1:1k.g'r'£ii, HCGP)

iifihpisviioriiriiinzal petition is fiied L1/S 449 of Cr.P.C. praying

 xalplow ihie petition in S.C.No.329/2009 (in Gokak  PS.
I (;§".l$loi."£.I6O/2009) pending before the V Adcfi. Sessions Judge,
i' iBd1'ga--um, and etc.

This petition Coming on for orders this day, the Court

ii  b iivmade the following:

3; 'E .



 the promise made by accused no.1

Ix.)

ORDER

The petitioner is facing charge for offences puiiis'h_a'b1e under sections 376 and 420 of IPC in Crime No. ~ was registered as C.C.No.i020/O9. _Q.i1,__comrriiit't'ai1._;:v.it'*isU.nowi° registered as S.C.No.329/2009 on7fthe_"cfi'ie Sessions Judge, Belgaum.

2. The allegatioiiigjis oii.,_&theifrie'po'rt of one Lakkavva Mahantesh Mooli, working under the petitioner the promise of marrying on more than one occasion, conset{1_*1ent:'«to she was impregnated. She kept him informed _thia't_iis--h'e iha,d"4cionceived through him, but he again promised ..he'm5r marrying her. in this manner, for eight iimoniths ciontinuediiito have sexual intimacy. But in the 5"' monith her pregnancy, he denied being responsible for it and refused to. her. She revealed this fact to her mother who T3"-'«.__i'approacheid the accused and his brothers. All of them refused She again approached the village elders whose advise wasé/H 2' ; .

'.aJ not heeded to by the petitioner. In this manner, the petitioner is supposed to have cheated her and having exp1o_ite.ci~.Vhe'r sexually left her in iurch. On these allegations, .th~e ' was arrested. -

3. The petitioner had Crl.P.7782/2009 seeking 1)ai1,ii1'\x{h'ieh th.i'::V_Cot1rt_ '{)1,Eti"ii granted him opportunityfto approach_ this Coi,1r.t_Ma{ter charge sheet is filed. As the filed and case is registered on the file of Sessi'o-niis Judge', moved this baii petition in terms. éoffthe e-'os.eri.ratioi1s&* this court in the order passed 'er1[f»';;:7'7s'2./2.oo9'."*-~--

4. The filed detailed counter. It is seen that the 'petitioneriafteriobtaining order dated 8.9.2009 in G9 periiinit--ti--i"1g him to approach this court after ii'-eLharige»shveet :fiie.d, had applied in CrE.P.8109/09, which came toiii3eii'rejected_ 15.12.2009 on merits taking note of the earlier order also. Since no new circumstance is pointed out iv.suhse'e;uent to the order dated 15.12.2009, and as the '*«i«i--'pro.secuE.ion material which was considered by that Courtiwhile fa LL 2' 5 V' passing that order has remained umassailed, justiﬁcation to entertain this petition. It is accordingly rejected.

Sub*

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court