Karnataka High Court
K.M.Noorulla vs State Of Karnataka on 8 August, 2018
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1502/2015
BETWEEN
1. K M Noorulla
s/o late Ibrahim
aged about 79 years
r/a No.56, Noorkhans
Mangalanagara
Mangalore-575003.
2. Smt.Ayisha
w/o K M Noorulla
aged about 68 years
r/a No.56, Noorkhans
Mangalanagara
Mangalore-575003.
3. Sri Anwar
s/o late M Sulaioman
Aged about years
r/a Padil Post, Alape
Mangalore-575007
4. Sri Soud @ Arshaq Hussain
s/o K M Nooralla
Aged about 55 years
Permanent r/a No.303
Vishwas Kalanand
Hoyge Bazaar
Mangalore-575005.
2
5. Smt.Shajad Bolar
s/o Mohideen
aged about 24 years
Permanent r/o No.408
Nalapad Kunil Tower
3rd Floor, Nellikai Road
Bunder, Mangalore-575004.
6. Smt.Nushrath @ Quraisha
Nushrath, w/o Sri Anwar
Aged about 36 years
r/a Padil Post, Alape
Mangalore-575007. .. Petitioners
(By Smt.Haleema Ameen for Sri Vishwajith Shetty,
Advocate)
AND
1. State of Karnataka
By R T Nagar Police Station
Bengaluru, Represented by
State Public Prosecutor
High Court Buildings
Bengaluru-560 001.
2. Smt.Katheeja Kausar
w/o Arafath Ameen
d/o Haiderali
Aged about years
Flat No.A11, 2nd Floor
West Wing, C R Bande
K B Sandra, R T Nagar
Bengaluru-560032. .. Respondents
(By Sri Vijayakumar Majage, Addl. SPP for R1,
R2-served - unrepresented)
3
This Crl.P is filed U/s. 482 Cr.P.C praying to quash
the entire proceedings in CR No.344/14 of R T Nagar P.S.,
Bengaluru registered by the 1st respondent police for the
offence punishable under Section 498-A, 506 read with
Section 34 of IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act on the file of
the Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
This Criminal Petition coming on for final hearing
this day, the court made the following:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Additional SPP appearing for the 1st respondent - State.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners made the submission that this petition has been filed only challenging the registration of FIR. But it is brought to the notice of the Court that this time the investigation was complete and chargesheet has been filed. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners wanted to challenge the materials collected during the 4 investigation. Therefore, the petitioners may be permitted to withdraw the petition with liberty to file fresh petition.
In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petition is disposed off as withdrawn. The petitioners are at liberty to file fresh petition, if so desired.
Sd/-
JUDGE Bkm.