PAVITRA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No.2/2020, the said I.A.No.2/2020 is allowed. The additional document in terms of six photographs produced by the petitioners is taken on record.

(2.) The petitioner is before this Court seeking for a certiorari to quash the abate charge sheet in FIR No.322/2017 registered by Raibag P.S. and consequently a mandamus directing the Raibag P.S. to conduct re-enquiry and submit a fresh charge sheet before the jurisdictional Court.

(3.) The first petitioner is the wife of deceased-Gajanand Shegunashi and the second petitioner is the father of the deceased. Second petitioner filed a complaint before the Raibag P.S. on 05.11.2017 stating that on 04.11.2017 at about 5:00 p.m. his son called him and told that he is coming to the village. Thereafter, at about 8:15 p.m. one Channagouda Mudigouda Patil, who is a friend of the deceased had called him over phone and told him that his son-deceased had met with an accident near Nipanal village, and but he has been taken to a hospital in an ambulance. As such he asked the second petitioner to come to the hospital immediately.