Laxman Rangappa Singaraddi vs The State of Karnataka represented by PSI Lokapur PS — 10011/2026
Case under Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam Section U/Sec 482 of BNS-2023. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 13th March 2026.
Crl.Misc. - CRIMINAL MISC.CASES
CNR: KABK220001062026
e-Filing Number
20-02-2026
Filing Number
10011/2026
Filing Date
21-02-2026
Registration No
10011/2026
Registration Date
21-02-2026
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
13th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Laxman Rangappa Singaraddi
Adv. Jagadeesh Koujalagi
Dr Pandu Laxman Singaraddi
Adv. Jagadeesh Koujalagi
Dr Vinod Laxman Singaraddi
Adv. Jagadeesh Koujalagi
Laxmibayi Laxman Singaraddi
Adv. Jagadeesh Koujalagi
Sadashiv Bhimappa Singaraddi
Adv. Jagadeesh Koujalagi
Venkatesh Bhimappa Singaraddi
Adv. Jagadeesh Koujalagi
Respondent(s)
The State of Karnataka represented by PSI Lokapur PS (Police Station)
Hearing History
Judge: 1565-III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE BAGALKOT TO SIT AT MUDHOL
Disposed
ORDER
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 10-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 06-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 05-03-2026 | HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court granted anticipatory bail to three of six accused persons (petitioners 1, 4, and 5) in a land dispute case involving rioting, assault, and unlawful assembly charges, while rejecting bail for the younger accused (petitioners 2, 3, and 6). The court distinguished on the basis of age and flight risk—the senior citizens and elderly woman posed no danger of fleeing or obstructing justice, while the younger accused with serious allegations warranted detention pending investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court granted anticipatory bail to three of six accused persons (petitioners 1, 4, and 5) in a land dispute case involving rioting, assault, and unlawful assembly charges, while rejecting bail for the younger accused (petitioners 2, 3, and 6). The court distinguished on the basis of age and flight risk—the senior citizens and elderly woman posed no danger of fleeing or obstructing justice, while the younger accused with serious allegations warranted detention pending investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts