Supreme Court of India
AKHIL KUMAR G @ AKHIL KUMAR GUNDA VS. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 27 October 2026
SLP(Crl.) No. 15465/2025
ITEM NO.27 COURT NO.7 SECTION II-E
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 15465/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01-04-2025
in CRLP No. 6444/2022 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru]
AKHIL KUMAR G @ AKHIL KUMAR GUNDA & ANR. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.
Respondent(s)
(IA No. 43919/2026 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS)
Date : 27-10-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
For Petitioner(s) :
Mr. K. Parameshwar, Sr. Adv. (N/P)
Mr. P. Gangaiah Naidu, Sr. Adv. (N/P)
Mr. Gunnam Venkateswara Rao- 1592, AOR
Mr. Sai Kaushal, Adv.
Mr. Adit Garg, Adv.
Mr. Prasad Hegde, Adv.
Ms. Vallari K.N., Adv.
For Respondent(s) :
Mr. Prateek Chhadha, Adv.
Mr. Rajesh Gulab Inamdar, AOR
Mr. Shashwat Anand, Adv.
Ms. Rakshita Singh, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following
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.
O R D E R
Office report dated 26.10.2026 reflects that respondent No. 2 still remains unserved, as the notice was returned with the endorsement “No such person in this address”. In the light of the aforestated endorsement, we see no purpose served in permitting the learned counsel for the petitioners to
Digitally signed by Deepak Guglani Date: 2026.10.28 18:46:05 IST
Reason:
Signature Not Verified
SLP(Crl.) No. 15465/2025 effect substituted service, as sought in I.A. No. 323344/2026, by way of affixation of the notice at the last known premises of the unserved respondent No. 2 in terms of Order XLIII Rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. The application is, accordingly, dismissed, leaving it open to the learned counsel for the petitioners to take appropriate measures to complete service of notice upon respondent No. 2. Re-list on 02.02.2027. (DEEPAK GUGLANI) (PREETI SAXENA) DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH)