citedby: 41784762

Hemanth vs State Of Karnataka on 4 December, 2018

4. This Court has taken a consistent view that the penal provisions of the Act are not applicable so far as customers in a brothel house are concerned. [See Narasimha Murthy vs. The State by Hennuru Police Station and another (Crl.P.No.5275/2017 D.D. 07.12.2017)].

Karnataka High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - P S Kumar - Full Document

Sri. Yogish T R vs The State By Jayanagara P S on 3 January, 2019

In the circumstances, following the said decision, this petition is allowed and the proceedings in S.C No. 73/2018 pending on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge at Tumakuru are quashed, so far as the petitioner is concerned.

Karnataka High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - P S Kumar - Full Document

Mr K Dinesh vs State Of Karnataka on 1 February, 2019

In the circumstances, following the said decision, this petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.1795/2013 pending on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court - I, Mayo Hall, Bengaluru, are quashed, so far as the petitioner is concerned.

Karnataka High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - P S Kumar - Full Document

Sri Lingaraju V S vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 February, 2019

5. This Court has taken a consistent view that the penal provisions of the Act are not applicable so far as customers in a brothel house are concerned. [See Narasimha Murthy vs. The State by Hennuru Police Station and another (Crl.P.No.5275/2017 D.D. 07.12.2017)].

Karnataka High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - P S Kumar - Full Document

Pushal @ Faisal vs State By Gundlupet on 7 August, 2019

4. This Court has taken a consistent view that the penal provisions of the Act are not applicable so far as customers in a brothel house are concerned. [See Narasimha Murthy vs. The State by Hennuru Police Station and another (Crl.P.No.5275/2017 D.D. 07.12.2017)].

Karnataka High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - P S Kumar - Full Document

Umesh vs State Of Karnataka on 8 August, 2019

3. This Court has taken a consistent view that the penal provisions of the Act are not applicable so far as customers in a brothel house are concerned. [See Narasimha Murthy vs. The State by Hennuru Police Station and another (Crl.P.No.5275/2017 D.D. 07.12.2017)].

Karnataka High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - P S Kumar - Full Document

Yashavanth.M vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 August, 2019

In the circumstances, following the said decision, this petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C No.2303/2014 in Crime No.205/2014, pending on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court-1, Mayohall, Bengaluru, are quashed, so far as petitioner is concerned.

Karnataka High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - P S Kumar - Full Document

Pradeepa vs State Of Karnataka on 26 August, 2019

4. This Court has taken a consistent view that the penal provisions of the Act are not applicable so far 3 as customers in a brothel house are concerned. [See Narasimha Murthy vs. The State by Hennuru Police Station and another (Crl.P.No.5275/2017 D.D. 07.12.2017)].

Karnataka High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - P S Kumar - Full Document

Muzamil Sheikh vs State Of Karnataka By on 23 August, 2019

4. This Court has taken a consistent view that the penal provisions of the Act are not applicable so far as customers in a brothel house are concerned. [See Narasimha Murthy vs. The State by Hennuru Police Station and another (Crl.P.No.5275/2017 D.D. 07.12.2017)].

Karnataka High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - P S Kumar - Full Document

Yogaraj vs The State Of Karnataka on 26 August, 2019

In the circumstances, following the said decision, this petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.1271/2018 (old C.C.No.1035/2017) arising out of Crime No.41/2017 pending on the file of III JMFC Court, Davanagere, are quashed, so far as the petitioners are concerned.

Karnataka High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - P S Kumar - Full Document

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results