Ramesh vs State By Kuduru Police Station on 21 June, 2018

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Ramesh vs State By Kuduru Police Station on 21 June, 2018

Bench: K.Somashekar

                        :1:



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JUNE, 2018

                      BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR

     CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 860 OF 2015

BETWEEN

RAMESH,
S/O NARASIMHAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
R/AT BETTAHALLIPALYA,
KUDURU HOBLI,
MAGADI TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 120.
                                    ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. A.V. RAMAKRISHNA., ADVOCATE)

AND

1.    STATE BY KUDURU POLICE STATION,
      REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
      HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
      HIGH COURT BUILDING,
      BENGALURU - 560 001.

2.    KUM. SHASHIKALA,
      D/O LATE MUDDAPPA,
      AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,
      R/O BETTAHALLI VILLAGE,
      KUDURU HOBLI,
      MAGADI TALUK,
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 120.
                                  ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S. VISHWAMURTHY, HCGP FOR R1.
    SRI. KALYAN R., ADVOCATE FOR R2.)
                             :2:



R2 IMPLEADED VIDE COURT
ORDER DATED 31.08.2015.


     THIS CRL.R.P. IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 OF
CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
10.07.2015 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RAMANAGARA IN S.C.NO.
104/2011 AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED U/S
216 CR.P.C.

     THIS CRL.R.P. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                        ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Trial Court in S.C.No.104/2011, rejecting the application filed under Section 216 Cr.P.C. seeking alteration of the charge narrated in that application, wherein the accused was charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 417, 506 IPC. The charges have been framed by the Trial Court for the aforesaid offences. The victim who is the daughter of one Muddappa is aged 21 years. This accused is said to have had sexual intercourse with the victim promising to marry her, by which she got pregnant. The same is reflected in the :3: order passed by the Trial Court in S.C.No.104/2011 on an application filed under Section 216 Cr.P.C. Further, the DNA profile also reveals that the accused is the biological father of the child of the victim Kumari Shashikala aged 21 years. These facts are revealed from the impugned order passed by the Trial Court.

2. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he seeks to withdraw the petition as not pressed. The memo filed in this regard is taken on record.

3. Consequently, reserving liberty to the petitioner to proceed in accordance with law, the petition is dismissed as not pressed.

Sd/-

JUDGE KS

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court