Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 24610
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
J.M.KHAZI, J
PARAMASHIVAIAH, S/O LATE NEELAKANTE GOWDA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5237 OF 2023 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) | CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5023 OF 2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. A.C.BALARAJ
For the Respondents: SRI.B.LAKSHMAN, SRI.ROSHAN.M.C.
Withdrawal of petitions under section 482 Cr.P.C. is permissible when requested by the petitioners.
Headnote:The petitions, filed under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., sought to quash the FIR related to offences under the IPC and DP Act. The court determined that the petitioners had indicated their intention to withdraw the petitions. The petition was dismissed as withdrawn under these circumstances. The core issue involved whether the petitions could be withdrawn after filing. The court reasoned that a withdrawal is permissible under the procedural aspects of the law, particularly when the petitioners request it explicitly, allowing the court to terminate the proceedings accordingly. The petitions were dismissed as withdrawn, and all pending applications were disposed of without separate orders.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural actions regarding legal representation. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioners expressed a desire to withdraw the petitions. (Para 2) |
| 3. court fulfills procedural requests leading to dismissal without further order. (Para 3 , 4) |
ORAL ORDER
Since, Sri A.C.Balaraj, learned counsel has filed vakalath for the petitioner, office is directed to delete the name of Sri M.B.Chandrachooda, learned counsel, who was representing the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo seeking permission to withdraw the petition.
3. In the light of the same, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
4. In view of the disposal of the petition, pending application/s, if any, stands disposed off, as no separate order is required.
HC-KAR
5. This petition is de-linked from Crl.P No.4025/2023.
