S.H.O. Gangolli Police Station vs Mohammed Riyaz — 4/2021

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 506,341,143,147,148,149,323. Status: A.D.R.. Next hearing: 14th March 2026.

C.C. - CRIMINAL CASES

CNR: KAUP330000152021

A.D.R.

Next Hearing

14th March 2026

e-Filing Number

02-01-2021

Filing Number

4/2021

Filing Date

02-01-2021

Registration No

4/2021

Registration Date

02-01-2021

Court

ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUNDAPURA

Judge

517-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 506,341,143,147,148,149,323

Petitioner(s)

S.H.O. Gangolli Police Station

Adv. The APP Kundapura

Respondent(s)

Mohammed Riyaz

Asfak Ahammed

Mohammed Ashraf

Ahammed

Sathish Devadiga

Hearing History

Judge: 517-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC

06-03-2026

A.D.R.

25-02-2026

NOTICE

07-02-2026

EVIDENCE

22-12-2025

EVIDENCE

29-11-2025

EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

07-04-2025
Deposition
20-06-2025
Deposition
16-08-2025
Deposition
16-08-2025
Deposition
20-09-2025
Deposition

The court order from the Additional Civil Judge, Kundapura (dated 20.09.2025) in CC No. 4/2021 addresses a criminal matter involving accused persons and vehicle seizure. The defense counsel challenged the legality of the accused's custody and vehicle seizure, arguing lack of proper written orders and procedural irregularities. The court found merit in these objections, rejecting the prosecution's narrative regarding the arrest circumstances and seizure of two vehicles (KA-20-MB-6559 and KA-20-MA-3933). The case proceeded with witness examination, with 2 of 4 accused persons being examined before the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court order from the Additional Civil Judge, Kundapura (dated 20.09.2025) in CC No. 4/2021 addresses a criminal matter involving accused persons and vehicle seizure. The defense counsel challenged the legality of the accused's custody and vehicle seizure, arguing lack of proper written orders and procedural irregularities. The court found merit in these objections, rejecting the prosecution's narrative regarding the arrest circumstances and seizure of two vehicles (KA-20-MB-6559 and KA-20-MA-3933). The case proceeded with witness examination, with 2 of 4 accused persons being examined before the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUNDAPURA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case