State of Karnataka vs parvatevva Puttappa Adurashettar — 446/2018
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section IPC1860us406,420,467,468,471,34Act1955us3,7. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 18th March 2026.
C.C. - CRIMINAL CASES
CNR: KAHV020014412018
Next Hearing
18th March 2026
Filing Number
446/2018
Filing Date
12-06-2018
Registration No
446/2018
Registration Date
23-06-2018
Court
PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, HAVERI
Judge
352-PRL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Karnataka
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
parvatevva Puttappa Adurashettar
Puttappa Shivappa Baraker, Age 32 Years, Occ. Computer work, R/o APMC Market, Haveri.
Hearing History
Judge: 352-PRL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 11-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 21-01-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 19-12-2025 | EVIDENCE |
| 05-12-2025 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Court: Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haveri Case No.: CC 446/2018 Outcome: The court examined witness testimony regarding a public distribution scheme case involving alleged misappropriation of food grains worth Rs. 72,744. The witness (Umesh Surangi) testified on 11.02.2026 about charges against food distribution officials. The court found inconsistencies in the investigation and administrative directions, noting that false cases were filed based on superior officers' instructions. The hearing concluded with no further examination required, and the case record was marked accordingly by the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Court: Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haveri Case No.: CC 446/2018 Outcome: The court examined witness testimony regarding a public distribution scheme case involving alleged misappropriation of food grains worth Rs. 72,744. The witness (Umesh Surangi) testified on 11.02.2026 about charges against food distribution officials. The court found inconsistencies in the investigation and administrative directions, noting that false cases were filed based on superior officers' instructions. The hearing concluded with no further examination required, and the case record was marked accordingly by the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts