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

2023 Supreme(Kar) 165

M. NAGAPRASANNA
M. S. Faneesha, S/o M. R. Srinivasa Murthy – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :SRI MANJUNATH B.R., ADVOCATE
For the Respondent: SMT.K.P.YASHODHA

ORDER :

The petitioner, common in all these cases, calls in question similar but separate charge sheets filed by the Police and all of them are pending as different criminal cases on such charge sheets. In the light of the petitioner being the same and the issue being similar, all these cases are taken up together and considered by this common order. For the sake of convenience the facts obtaining in Criminal Petition No.7507 of 2022 which are similar in all these cases are narrated briefly.

2. Heard Sri B.R. Manjunath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. K.P. Yashoda, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 in all these cases.

3. The petitioner is an employee of the Department of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj. The employment of the petitioner is not the issue in the lis. During the years 2009 and 2010 certain works under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (‘MGNREGA’ for short) were entrusted to several Gram Panchayats of Arkalgud Taluk. The petitioner then was working as Executive Officer of Arkalgud Taluk Panchayat. Alleging that the petitioner had misappropriated funds of MGNREGA, a complaint comes to be re


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