State,Somwarpet P.S. vs Jagadish B. M. Advocate - K.A. Keerthi Raj Kumar — 84/2024

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 504,506,307,R/w,34. Status: Evidence - Criminal. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.

Evidence - Criminal Next hearing 27-Mar-2026 this date has passed

SC - SESSION CASES

CNR: KAKD010011432024

Filing Number

84/2024

Filing Date

25-Sep-2024

Registration No

84/2024

Registration Date

25-Sep-2024

Court

PRL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MADIKERI

Judge

363-Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

Last updated 12-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 504,506,307,R/w,34

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State,Somwarpet P.S.

    Adv. Public Procecutor

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Jagadish B. M. Advocate - K.A. Keerthi Raj Kumar

  2. 2.Ashray

    Adv. K.A. Keerthi Raj Kumar

  3. 3.Manjunath.B.M

    Adv. K.A. Keerthi Raj Kumar

Case History

  1. 27-Mar-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    DepositionView PDF

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    DepositionView PDF

    Summary: This is a trial court order from the Principal District and Sessions Court, Kodagu-Madikeri (SC No. 84/2024) recording the examination of witness PW-7 (Shri Devraj, age 59, a cutting shop worker from Somarapete) on 09-03-2026. The witness denied knowledge of the accused persons and disputed the police's seizure of alleged evidence, stating he did not know what was written in the FIR memo or why photographs were taken. The prosecution cross-examined him as a hostile witness, while the defense counsel for accused 1-3 had no cross-examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    Evidence - Criminal

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  5. 07-Mar-2026

    DepositionView PDF

  6. 07-Mar-2026

    DepositionView PDF

  7. 07-Mar-2026

    Evidence - Criminal

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  8. 06-Mar-2026

    Evidence - Criminal

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  9. 09-Dec-2025

    Evidence - Criminal

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  10. 08-Dec-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  11. 08-Dec-2025

    Evidence - Criminal

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  12. 06-Dec-2025

    Evidence - Criminal

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  13. 28-Aug-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  14. 28-Aug-2025

    Evidence - Criminal

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  15. 22-Aug-2025

    DepositionView PDF

  16. 22-Aug-2025

    Evidence - Criminal

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  17. 21-Aug-2025

    Evidence - Criminal

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  18. 23-Jun-2025

    Evidence - Criminal

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  19. 21-Jun-2025

    Evidence - Criminal

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  20. 20-Jun-2025

    Evidence - Criminal

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  21. 24-Mar-2025

    Evidence - Criminal

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  22. 14-Feb-2025

    ChargeView PDF

  23. 14-Feb-2025

    Fdt-Fixing Date of Trial

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  24. 30-Jan-2025

    Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  25. 16-Jan-2025

    Charge

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  26. 10-Dec-2024

    Framing Of Charge Or Plea

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  27. 04-Nov-2024

    Summons

    Prl District And Sessions Judge Madikeri.

  28. 26-Sep-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  29. 25-Sep-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 84/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: This is a trial court order from the Principal District and Sessions Court, Kodagu-Madikeri (SC No. 84/2024) recording the examination of witness PW-7 (Shri Devraj, age 59, a cutting shop worker from Somarapete) on 09-03-2026. The witness denied knowledge of the accused persons and disputed the police's seizure of alleged evidence, stating he did not know what was written in the FIR memo or why photographs were taken. The prosecution cross-examined him as a hostile witness, while the defense counsel for accused 1-3 had no cross-examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case