Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Sri.J.N.Prathapa Simha vs State Of Karnataka on 6 August, 2020

Bench: B.V.Nagarathna, Ravi V Hosmani

                           1




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 6th DAY OF AUGUST, 2020

                      PRESENT

       THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA

                          AND

        THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI

                  WPHC.NO.47/2020

BETWEEN :

SRI J.N.PRATHAPA SIMHA
S/O NARASIMHA MURTHY,
AGED 60 YEARS,
R/AT NO.264, 5TH CROSS,
KUVEMPU LAYOUT,
CHICKASANDRA,
BENGALURU-560 090.                  ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI AKASH B.SHETTY, ADV., THROUGH V.C)

AND:

1.     STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REP. BY HOME SECRETARY,
       VIDHANA SOUDHA,
       BANGALORE-560 001.

2.     THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
       BANGALORE ICTY,
       INFANTRY ROAD,
       BANGALORE-560 001.

3.     THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
       YESHWANTPUR SUB-DIVISION,
       BANGALORE-660 022.
                               2




4.   THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
     SOLADEVANAHALLI POLICE STATION,
     SOLADEVANAHALLI,
     BANGALORE-560 090.
                                  ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI V.S.HEGDE, SPP-II )

     THIS WPHC IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
RESPONDENT NO.4 TO PRODUCE THE CORPUS OF VIKRAM
SIMHA, S/O PRATHAP SIMHA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT   NO.264,     5TH CROSS,    KUVEMPU     LAYOUT,
CHICKASANDRA, BENGALURU-560 090, WHO IS MISSING
SINCE 22.07.2020, BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT.

    THIS WPHC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
NAGARATHNA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                         ORDER

We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned SPP-II for the respondents through Video Conference.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition has been rendered infructuous as the son of the petitioner namely Vikram Simha had been to Dharmastala and since returned home, he, therefore, 3 submits that the writ petition would not survive for consideration.

3. Learned SPP-II for the respondents submits that the status report has also been filed and it has been stated that the son of the petitioner has returned home and that he had been to Dharmastala. As he returned home on his own, nothing would survive in this matter.

4. Submission of learned counsel for the respective parties is placed on record.

5. In the circumstances, we find that the writ petition will no longer survive for further consideration. Hence, it stands disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE Sd/-

JUDGE PB