Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J
SHAKILA WILLIS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the case and parties involved. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments of the petitioners regarding the nature of the marriage. (Para 5) |
| 3. court's analysis of the complaint and factual background. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. discussion on the evidence and legal implications. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. court's observations on the necessity of a trial. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. judicial precedents and their relevance to the current case. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 7. final dismissal of the review petition. (Para 19) |
ORDER
Three of these petitions are between the same parties. They call in question different stages of proceedings before the concerned Court. Before embarking upon noticing the facts, I deem it appropriate to notice the protagonists of the crime and their relationship between themselves. One Syed Ali Hindustani is the complainant, husband of accused No.1 and son-in-law of accused No.2. Facts obtaining in each of these cases sans their details would be narrated hereunder:
2. Accused Nos.1 and 2 had approached this Court in Writ Petition No.24602 of 2021 calling in question the crime so registered against them in Crime No.216 of 2021 for offences punishable under Sections 380, 384, 389, 406,
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
