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

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - PRINCIPAL BENCH AT BENGALURU
ADIL PARVEEZ – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order

dated 4-06-2022, by which, the Additional City Civil and

Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, Bengaluru in Special C.C.No.138 of 2015

rejects a memo filed by the petitioner seeking assistance of a

translator to the questions posed for recording statement of the

petitioner under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C.

2. Heard Sri Mohamed Nasiruddin, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri K.S.Abhijith, learned High Court Government

Pleader for the respondent.

3. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition as

borne out from the pleadings are as follows:

3

The petitioner is the accused of a complaint being registered

on 11-12-2014 alleging that on 06-12-2014 when the mother of the

victim was not in the house, the petitioner goes into the house on

the ground that he would teach her Quran and sends her sister

Asiya to bring chocolate from a shop outside the house. When Asiya

went out to bring chocolate, it is alleged that the petitioner had

behaved with the victim in a manner that would become punishable

under the provisions of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences

Act, 2012 (8POCSO Act9 for short). The issue is not wit

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