Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/5505/2019 of MRS VIJAYAMMA Vs MRS SHANTHAMMA on 15 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010403622019 NC: 2026:KHC:50299 CRL.P No. 5505 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5505 OF 2019 BETWEEN: MRS. VIJAYAMMA W/O MR MUNISHAMI AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5505 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
MRS. VIJAYAMMA
W/O MR MUNISHAMI
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
RESIDING AT 2ND ‘A’ CROSS
NEAR DURGA DEVI TEMPLE
V V EXTESNION, HOSKOTE
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 114
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. DR.S.ARUMUGHAM, ADVOCATE)
AND:
MRS. SHANTHAMMA
W/O LATE MR. PUTTASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/O 2ND CROSS
GANGAMMAGUDI ROAD
M V EXTENSION, HOSKOTE
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 114
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI A YOGASREE, ADVOCATE [ABSENT])
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO
QUASH THE COMPLAINT DATED 05.10.2013 ANNEXURE-B AND
THE
ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS
AT
ANNEXURE-A
IN
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
C.C.NO.1243/2013 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE
AND J.M.F.C., HOSAKOTE AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. This petition is of the year 2019 and the counsel for the petitioner is not pursuing the matter diligently. The relief is sought to quash the complaint dated 05.10.2013 and the entire proceedings in C.C.No.1243/2013 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Hoskote and also for challenging of taking cognizance for the said offence.
2. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that already trial has been commenced and complainant has been cross examined partly. The counsel for the respondent also submits that did not cross examine the witness in entirety and accused also absent and NBW was also issued. In view of taking of cognizance and already trial has been commenced and PW1 was partly cross examined, the question of
HC-KAR
considering the taking of cognizance does not arise. Hence, the petition becomes infructuous. The counsel for the petitioner also not pursuing the matter diligently. Hence, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
SN