VEENA KARANTH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sri Sudesh Kumar Acharya U, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks time to comply with office objections. But however, requests this Court to take up the matter due to urgency. Acceding to his request, pending such compliances the matter is taken up.

(2.) Smt. Rashmi Jadhav, learned HCGP accepts notice for respondent No.1. Since the petition is being disposed of at the stage of Admission, I am of the opinion that there is no requirement of service of notice to respondent No.2, since no orders are passed against respondent No.2.

(3.) The petitioners are before this Court seeking for quashing of the proceedings in Crime No. 67/2020 registered by the Manipal Polcie Station pending on the file of II Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and JMFC, Udupi punishable under Sections 341, 323 & 506 R/w 34 of IPC.