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

2025 Supreme(Online)(SC) 6730

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA, MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN, JJ
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Appellant
Versus
SRI DARSHAN ETC. – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv., Mr. D. L. Chidananda, AOR, Mr. P Prasanna Kumar, Adv., Mr. Anil C Nishani, Adv., Mr. Sachin, Adv., Mr. Mihir Joshi, Adv., Mr. Manthan Dayanad, Adv., Mr. Gaurav Chauhan, Adv., Mr. Vishwesh R Murnal, Adv., Mr. Ravindera Kumar Verma, Adv., Mr. Ishan Roy Chaudhary, Adv., Mr. Madhav B. Kashyap, Adv., Mr. Rahul K. Reddy, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv., Ms. Tanisha Kaushal, Adv., Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, Adv., Mr. Ashwin Vaish, Adv., Mr. Sunil Kumar S, Adv.

Table of Content
1. court addressed procedural compliance for written submissions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. parties permitted to file timely submissions. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. court reserved judgment after hearing. (Para 8)

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

1. Application seeking exemption from filing official translation of the Annexures is allowed.

3. Judgment reserved.

5. Mr. Siddharth Dave, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1 has also filed his written submissions.

7. So far as other accused persons are concerned, their respective learned counsel may file their respective written submissions not more than three pages within a period of one week from today.

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