SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(Kar) 693

MOHAMED ANWAR
SIDDANAGOUDA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


Advocates:
R.B.DESHPANDE, S.Mahesh, S.S.Guttal

( 1 ) HEARD both sides.

( 2 ) BY this petition the petitioner who is accused in Crime No. 191/94 of Bijapur Rural P. S. registered against him and four others for offences under Section 171 (4) read with Section 109, I. P. C. seeks quashing of the investigation of the crime by the concerned police on the ground that the alleged offences are non-cognizable offences and, therefore, the police have no jurisdiction to investigate into the same.

( 3 ) ON the first information of one Vijayakumar Patil received by the S. H. O. through the concerned Election Officer, the said Crime No. 191/94 was booked against petitioner and four others on 29-11-1994 at about 11. 15 p. m. The place of incident is shown as at a distance of 5 K. ms. from the said police station. Immediately after registration of the crime the S. H. O. (PSI) proceeded to the spot where co-accused Nos. 2 to 5 were present in an Ambassador car bearing No. MYB 27. Then they arrested by the PSI and the said car together with the cash, two note books and voters list were seized by him under a panchanama in the presence of panchas during the same night between 1 a. m. and 2 a. m. Thereafter, on the following morning he despatched








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top