The State S.H.O.Shankaranarayana P.S. Rep.by APP Kundapura vs VIJETHA HEGDE @ RITESHA — 474/2024
Case under Indian Penal Code Section 454,380. Status: FOR COMPLY. Next hearing: 17th March 2026.
C.C. - CRIMINAL CASES
CNR: KAUP320012992024
Next Hearing
17th March 2026
e-Filing Number
20-01-2021
Filing Number
474/2024
Filing Date
20-06-2024
Registration No
474/2024
Registration Date
20-06-2024
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUNDAPURA
Judge
516-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State S.H.O.Shankaranarayana P.S. Rep.by APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor) Kundapura
Adv. The APP Kundapura
Respondent(s)
VIJETHA HEGDE @ RITESHA
Hearing History
Judge: 516-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
FOR COMPLY
STATEMENT u/s 313 CrPC
STATEMENT u/s 313 CrPC
STATEMENT u/s 313 CrPC
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | FOR COMPLY |
| 02-03-2026 | STATEMENT u/s 313 CrPC |
| 19-02-2026 | STATEMENT u/s 313 CrPC |
| 03-02-2026 | STATEMENT u/s 313 CrPC |
| 20-01-2026 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary This is a Kannada language civil court order from the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC Court in Kundapura (Case No. 474/2024). The court examined witness testimony in a theft case (Crime No. 95/2020) involving stolen gold jewelry and cash. After hearing arguments from both the prosecution and defense counsel regarding the credibility of evidence and witness statements, the court found discrepancies in the date mentioned in the accused's voluntary statement and procedural issues in evidence collection. The judgment concludes by noting these inconsistencies and directing that the case record be properly maintained for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary This is a Kannada language civil court order from the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC Court in Kundapura (Case No. 474/2024). The court examined witness testimony in a theft case (Crime No. 95/2020) involving stolen gold jewelry and cash. After hearing arguments from both the prosecution and defense counsel regarding the credibility of evidence and witness statements, the court found discrepancies in the date mentioned in the accused's voluntary statement and procedural issues in evidence collection. The judgment concludes by noting these inconsistencies and directing that the case record be properly maintained for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts