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.

SC - SESSION CASES

CNR: KAKD010011432024

EVIDENCE - Criminal

Next Hearing

27th March 2026

Filing Number

84/2024

Filing Date

25-09-2024

Registration No

84/2024

Registration Date

25-09-2024

Court

PRL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MADIKERI

Judge

363-PRL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE MADIKERI.

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

State,Somwarpet P.S.

Adv. Public Procecutor

Respondent(s)

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

Ashray

Adv. K.A. Keerthi Raj Kumar

Manjunath.B.M

Adv. K.A. Keerthi Raj Kumar

Hearing History

Judge: 363-PRL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE MADIKERI.

09-03-2026

EVIDENCE - Criminal

07-03-2026

EVIDENCE - Criminal

06-03-2026

EVIDENCE - Criminal

09-12-2025

EVIDENCE - Criminal

08-12-2025

EVIDENCE - Criminal

Interim Orders

14-02-2025
Charge
22-08-2025
Deposition
28-08-2025
Deposition
08-12-2025
Deposition
07-03-2026
Deposition
07-03-2026
Deposition
09-03-2026
Deposition
09-03-2026
Deposition

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.

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.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

PRL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MADIKERI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case