The State of Karnataka, Through PSI Mudhol P.S vs Ganesh Durgappa Metri Advocate - S.I.Hiremath — 10047/2025
Case under Section Sec.323,324,354,354(B),307,504,506(2),34IPC. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 06th March 2026.
SC - SESSION CASES
CNR: KABK220000932025
Filing Number
10047/2025
Filing Date
20-07-2022
Registration No
10047/2025
Registration Date
09-06-2025
Court
III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT,BAGALKOT TO SIT AT MUDHOL
Judge
1565-III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE BAGALKOT TO SIT AT MUDHOL
Decision Date
06th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State of Karnataka, Through PSI Mudhol P.S
Adv. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
Respondent(s)
Ganesh Durgappa Metri Advocate - S.I.Hiremath
Kalappa yallawwa Metri
Anand yallawwa Metri
Arun Basappa Metri
Hearing History
Judge: 1565-III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE BAGALKOT TO SIT AT MUDHOL
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
ARGUMENTES
ACCUSSED STATEMENT u/s 313 CrPC
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 28-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 18-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 17-02-2026 | ARGUMENTES |
| 12-02-2026 | ACCUSSED STATEMENT u/s 313 CrPC |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Judgment Summary The III Additional District & Sessions Judge of Bagalkote (Mudhol) acquitted all four accused persons of charges including criminal trespass, assault, attempt to murder, and criminal intimidation. The judge found the prosecution's evidence insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, citing multiple serious contradictions in witness testimonies regarding the place of the incident, significant delays in lodging the complaint, and suspicious circumstances including a counter-case filed by one of the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Court Judgment Summary The III Additional District & Sessions Judge of Bagalkote (Mudhol) acquitted all four accused persons of charges including criminal trespass, assault, attempt to murder, and criminal intimidation. The judge found the prosecution's evidence insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, citing multiple serious contradictions in witness testimonies regarding the place of the incident, significant delays in lodging the complaint, and suspicious circumstances including a counter-case filed by one of the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts