Shivalingesh Durgappa Madar vs Malatesh Ningappa Gumakar — 6/2019

Case under Prevention of Corruption Act Section 7,13(1)(D),r/w 13(2). Status: trial. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.

trial Next hearing 27-Mar-2026 this date has passed

SPL.C(SVC) - SVC CASES

CNR: KAHV010023102019

Filing Number

7/2019

Filing Date

12-Jul-2019

Registration No

6/2019

Registration Date

12-Jul-2019

Court

PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HAVERI

Judge

572-Prl District And Sessions Judge

Last updated 13-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Prevention of Corruption Act Section 7,13(1)(D),r/w 13(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Shivalingesh Durgappa Madar

    Adv. P P Haveri

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Malatesh Ningappa Gumakar

Case History

  1. 27-Mar-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  3. 13-Feb-2026

    F.D.T.

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  4. 12-Feb-2026

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  5. 31-Dec-2025

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  6. 12-Dec-2025

    F.D.T.

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  7. 28-Nov-2025

    F.D.T.

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  8. 07-Nov-2025

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  9. 31-Oct-2025

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  10. 12-Sep-2025

    DepositionView PDF

    Case Summary Case No.: Spl. SVC No.6/2019 PW-3 Date: 12/09/2025 The court examined witness testimony in this special case. The defense counsel challenged the credibility of the prosecution witness (PW-3), arguing that the witness did not actually visit the ARP office, did not see the accused, and that police fabricated documents without the witness's presence. The court rejected these arguments as false, finding the witness's testimony regarding visits to the office, police procedures, and documentary evidence to be credible. No further cross-examination was permitted, and the witness statement was admitted into the court record. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  11. 12-Sep-2025

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  12. 02-Aug-2025

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  13. 11-Jul-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  14. 11-Jul-2025

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  15. 19-Jun-2025

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  16. 04-Jun-2025

    F.D.T.

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  17. 13-Feb-2025

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  18. 19-Dec-2024

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  19. 04-Oct-2024

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  20. 09-Aug-2024

    DepositionView PDF

  21. 09-Aug-2024

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  22. 05-Jul-2024

    DepositionView PDF

  23. 05-Jul-2024

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  24. 14-Jun-2024

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  25. 26-Apr-2024

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  26. 21-Mar-2024

    DepositionView PDF

  27. 21-Mar-2024

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  28. 22-Feb-2024

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  29. 30-Dec-2023

    F.D.T.

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  30. 16-Oct-2023

    F.D.T.

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  31. 07-Sep-2023

    DepositionView PDF

  32. 07-Sep-2023

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  33. 23-Jun-2023

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  34. 20-May-2023

    F.D.T.

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  35. 04-May-2023

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  36. 04-Mar-2023

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  37. 22-Dec-2022

    DepositionView PDF

  38. 22-Dec-2022

    Further Evidence

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  39. 21-Oct-2022

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  40. 09-Sep-2022

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  41. 21-Jul-2022

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  42. 09-Jun-2022

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  43. 25-Mar-2022

    trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  44. 06-Jan-2022

    F.D.T.

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  45. 19-Nov-2021

    F.D.T.

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  46. 07-Oct-2021

    ChargeView PDF

  47. 07-Oct-2021

    F.D.T.

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  48. 03-Sep-2021

    Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  49. 24-Jun-2021

    Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  50. 08-Apr-2021

    Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  51. 21-Jan-2021

    Hearing Before Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  52. 26-Nov-2020

    Hearing Before Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  53. 10-Sep-2020

    Hearing Before Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  54. 06-Aug-2020

    Hearing Before Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  55. 16-Jul-2020

    Hearing Before Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  56. 18-Jun-2020

    Hearing Before Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  57. 11-Jun-2020

    Hearing Before Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  58. 20-Mar-2020

    Hearing Before Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  59. 09-Jan-2020

    Hearing Before Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  60. 18-Oct-2019

    Hearing Before Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge

  61. 29-Jul-2019

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  62. 12-Jul-2019

    Case filed

    Registration No. 6/2019

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary Case No.: Spl. SVC No.6/2019 PW-3 Date: 12/09/2025 The court examined witness testimony in this special case. The defense counsel challenged the credibility of the prosecution witness (PW-3), arguing that the witness did not actually visit the ARP office, did not see the accused, and that police fabricated documents without the witness's presence. The court rejected these arguments as false, finding the witness's testimony regarding visits to the office, police procedures, and documentary evidence to be credible. No further cross-examination was permitted, and the witness statement was admitted into the court record. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case