Back
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
RAVI V HOSMANI, J
MEVINDI VEERESHA ALIAS ERANNA A ALUR – Appellant
Versus
STATE BY HARIHAR TOWN POLICE STATION – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the court's observations stressed the necessity for a prima facie case to justify continuing trial. (Para 1 , 13 , 14 , 18 , 22) |
| 2. the court summarized the factual background of allegations of sexual assault and consequent legal actions. (Para 2 , 3 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. the defense emphasized contradictions in the prosecution's case and delayed complaint as key arguments for discharge. (Para 4 , 8 , 10 , 12) |
| 4. the court upheld established judicial principles concerning criteria for evaluating applications for discharge. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 21) |
| 5. the revision petition was ultimately dismissed with adherence to legal standards for proceedings. (Para 24) |
CAV ORDER
Challenging order dated 05.09.2024 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge and FTSC-I, Davanagere, in Spl.C.no.714/2023, rejecting application for discharge, this revision petition is filed.
2. Sri Basavaraj R., learned counsel for petitioner (accused no.2 and referred to as ‘petitioner’) submitted, case of prosecution was based on a complaint dated 11.08.2023 filed by respondent no.2 (‘complainant’) stating that one Vasudev Hiremath (accused no.1 and ‘VH’, for short) sexually assaulted her minor daughter on
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
