THE STATE OF KARNATAKA vs Preetam yane M.D. Preetam Manuel Dsouza — 35/2025
Case under Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act Section 3(2)(v). Status: fixing date of trail. Next hearing: 23rd April 2026.
SPL.C - SPECIAL CASES
CNR: KAUK010006002025
Next Hearing
23rd April 2026
e-Filing Number
21-04-2025
Filing Number
35/2025
Filing Date
22-04-2025
Registration No
35/2025
Registration Date
22-04-2025
Court
PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KARWAR
Judge
1407-II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGEUTTARA KANNADA
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Respondent(s)
Preetam yane M.D. Preetam Manuel Dsouza
Pooja Manjunath Murdeshwar Yane Pooja Gangadhar M
Adv. null
Hearing History
Judge: 1407-II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGEUTTARA KANNADA
fixing date of trail
fixing date of trail
fixing date of trail
fixing date of trail
fixing date of trail
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | fixing date of trail |
| 19-02-2026 | fixing date of trail |
| 04-02-2026 | fixing date of trail |
| 22-12-2025 | fixing date of trail |
| 28-11-2025 | fixing date of trail |
Interim Orders
BAIL DENIED The court rejected the bail application filed by Accused No. 2 (Puja), who was charged with instigating a murder on a bus on 22 February 2025. The judge found prima facie evidence of her involvement in conspiring with Accused No. 1 to kill her husband, including providing travel information and instigating the accused. Citing the heinous nature of the offense (punishable with death or life imprisonment), risk of evidence tampering (deleted WhatsApp messages awaiting FSL analysis), and witness intimidation, the court deemed bail inappropriate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
BAIL DENIED The court rejected the bail application filed by Accused No. 2 (Puja), who was charged with instigating a murder on a bus on 22 February 2025. The judge found prima facie evidence of her involvement in conspiring with Accused No. 1 to kill her husband, including providing travel information and instigating the accused. Citing the heinous nature of the offense (punishable with death or life imprisonment), risk of evidence tampering (deleted WhatsApp messages awaiting FSL analysis), and witness intimidation, the court deemed bail inappropriate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts