THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/by Manjunath Shankar Naik vs Anandu S/o. Krishna Shetti — 637/2022
Case under Essential Commodities Act Section 3,7. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 25th April 2026.
C.C. - CRIMINAL CASES
CNR: KAUK210013792022
Next Hearing
25th April 2026
Filing Number
637/2022
Filing Date
20-09-2022
Registration No
637/2022
Registration Date
20-09-2022
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ANKOLA
Judge
1334-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC ANKOLA
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/by Manjunath Shankar Naik
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Anandu S/o. Krishna Shetti
B.P. Jagannath S/o. Pokka gouda
Lekha S/o. Nagappa Naik
Hearing History
Judge: 1334-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC ANKOLA
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 21-01-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 22-12-2025 | EVIDENCE |
| 08-12-2025 | EVIDENCE |
| 18-11-2025 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Summary In Civil Case No. 637/2022 before the JMFC Court in Ankola (dated 22-12-2025), witness testimony was recorded on 22-12-2025 with the consent of the accused's counsel, as Accused No. 2 was absent and there was no dispute. The witness (Sooraj Tandel, age 26, fisherman) testified regarding alleged smuggling on 28-05-2021, but the court found significant discrepancies in the witness statement—including name variations in documents and lack of knowledge about the case details—leading the court to treat the witness as unreliable. The case was adjourned for further proceedings with the witness examination concluded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary In Civil Case No. 637/2022 before the JMFC Court in Ankola (dated 22-12-2025), witness testimony was recorded on 22-12-2025 with the consent of the accused's counsel, as Accused No. 2 was absent and there was no dispute. The witness (Sooraj Tandel, age 26, fisherman) testified regarding alleged smuggling on 28-05-2021, but the court found significant discrepancies in the witness statement—including name variations in documents and lack of knowledge about the case details—leading the court to treat the witness as unreliable. The case was adjourned for further proceedings with the witness examination concluded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts