Lokayukth PS Yadgir. vs Malappa Advocate - H M Patil — 41/2016
Case under Sec of Ipc Section U/Sec.7,13(1),(d)with13(2)ofPC.Act. Status: EVIDENCE-CRIMINAL. Next hearing: 19th June 2026.
SPL.C - SPECIAL CASES
CNR: KAYG010004362016
Next Hearing
19th June 2026
Filing Number
41/2016
Filing Date
30-04-2016
Registration No
41/2016
Registration Date
30-04-2016
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, YADGIR
Judge
936-PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE YADGIR
FIR Details
FIR Number
0002
Police Station
YADGIR LOKAYUKTHA PS
Year
2015
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Lokayukth PS (Police Station) Yadgir.
Adv. SPL. PP Lokyakuta
Respondent(s)
Malappa Advocate - H M Patil
Hearing History
Judge: 936-PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE YADGIR
EVIDENCE-CRIMINAL
EVIDENCE-CRIMINAL
EVIDENCE-CRIMINAL
EVIDENCE-CRIMINAL
EVIDENCE-CRIMINAL
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | EVIDENCE-CRIMINAL |
| 20-02-2026 | EVIDENCE-CRIMINAL |
| 30-01-2026 | EVIDENCE-CRIMINAL |
| 28-11-2025 | EVIDENCE-CRIMINAL |
| 31-10-2025 | EVIDENCE-CRIMINAL |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Spl.C 41/2016 Court: Special and Sessions Court, Yadgir Parties: Lokayukth PS Yadgir (Petitioner) vs. Malappa Advocate - H M Patil (Respondent) Outcome: The court recorded witness depositions on 20-02-2026 in a case involving allegations against a respondent who served as an ADA/ADR officer from 2010-2016. The court admitted various documentary evidence (service records, duty assignments) marked as exhibits NP-34 through NP-36. The proceedings involved examination and cross-examination of witnesses, with the court noting concerns about contradictory statements. No retrial was ordered. The case proceeded with witness testimony recorded and evidence documented. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Spl.C 41/2016 Court: Special and Sessions Court, Yadgir Parties: Lokayukth PS Yadgir (Petitioner) vs. Malappa Advocate - H M Patil (Respondent) Outcome: The court recorded witness depositions on 20-02-2026 in a case involving allegations against a respondent who served as an ADA/ADR officer from 2010-2016. The court admitted various documentary evidence (service records, duty assignments) marked as exhibits NP-34 through NP-36. The proceedings involved examination and cross-examination of witnesses, with the court noting concerns about contradictory statements. No retrial was ordered. The case proceeded with witness testimony recorded and evidence documented. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts