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

2017 Supreme(Kar) 1605

BUDIHAL R.B.
GURUSHNATHAPPA G. SHIVAJATAPPANAVAR – Appellant
Versus
CHANDRA PRAKASH F. AGARWAL – Respondent


Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Sri. Shrikant T. Patil and Sri Rohit S. Patil, Advocates

ORDER :

BUDIHAL R.B., J.

1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner present. Respondent, though served with the notice of the petition, has remained absent and there is no representation even today.

2. This petition is filed by the petitioner/complainant under section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying the Court to transfer the criminal case in C.C. No.5430/2015 on the file of the 16th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore to Kundgol Magistrate Court, Kundgol, in the ends of justice.

3. Brief facts of the case pleaded by the petitioner are that the petitioner is the complainant and the respondent is the accused before the Trial Court in C.C. No.5430/2015 pending before the 16th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru. It is further pleaded that accused has suffered a lot of illness in his health; because of the ailments, accused is continuously taking treatment in different hospitals; daughter of the accused is also suffering from ailments and she is also taking follow up treatment regularly. It is contended that, on 01.07.2014, the accused met the complainant and requested for financial help for the treatment for himself and for his daug









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