Crl.P.N0.7982 of 2010 : 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD Dated this the 301" Day of August 2010 Before . _ THE I-ION'BLE 1v1R..ms'r1c1:: ARALI NAGA_:RAJ_*V:...: _ Criminal Petition No.79eH2/2016-~ff'j;. 'elf . C BETWEEN: C it it C Shri. Naganath, S /o Shiddanagouda Patii, V . Age: 36 years, Occ: Service in Government ET I Co11eg"e;~..& V _4 V Vidyanagar, I-Iubii. _ ...Petitioner (By Sri. A.S.Pati1,__Advoea.te:']_ i A N D : The State of «. it Reptd. By""PSi1A,:i:Sub'%:Urban'- Po1ic"e'," ' Hubli, iiivoutbyg ' -- f Circuit Bench at ...Respondent
(By Sri_._ I{.B.4P,ciV.h3zVaVpaA1§;*.: Government Advocate)
c’riminal””p’etition is filed under Section 438 of
_VCo_c1e_-of*~,Crimina1 Procedure seeking to grant
“an’Lioipa,torryv “tzaii to the petitioner in the event of his
arrest’ by’_”_~-__t1’rie’ Sub–urban Police Hubli. in Crime
No.12?/20 ‘for the offence punishable under Section
–V 420 reaC1_wi’th Section 34 of rec.
” criminal petition coming on for further
_ aAr’gLn_(nents this day, the Court made the following:
a—–r~”””MX,.»’
Cr|.P.N0.7982 of 2010
oiéiiaa
Accused No.2 in Crime No.12?/2010 of Sub–urban
P.S., Hubli, has moved the present petitioner under
Section 438 of Cr.P.C. This petitioner and
accused are alleged to have committed the .
Section 420 read with Section 34 o_f».I.§:’.C’.
I
2. Today, the learned counse-1Afo1r’
submits that pending
petitioner has been arrestedVAd.anld:._h’e__Ais..n’o’.iI._AAinviijudicial
custody and thereforegii;’~id£’1’1r§~.iidetition may be
treated as the one of Cr.P.C. and
the same In View of this
s’ubmissior1v,..iit:h.e ;i5i:3ese’i*iit”-jidetiitionV”iis treated as the one
filed (3.
3. Hexiard both 1 it
then’cd£d_pid:ni dated 25.07.2010 filed by one
“‘_:I~3hVaskar%_ “the.:is’t1,ident of Government {TI Coiiege, Hubli, it
‘____£’s.«”]_,…-».,4
Cr|.P.l\io.7982 of 2010
is alleged that on 23.07.2010, he appeared for Social
Studies examination as he has been studying in 11
Year of {TE course in the said college and that on
Al Tanaji Chovan, who has been working ‘
said college, told the complainantmthat 0
him Rs.l,0O0/–, he could supply
pertaining to the calculationiigcaaifser, vi/hhich’ ig:..;:-%?1Ei’eCit1led it
to be held on 26,@7V..201..oi;–i:gafid~»i.’._aeelcriimgiiy, the
complainant gave him /–~ in
Room No.1 10 accused No.1
did not It is further alleged in
the herein and also one
Sanju money along with said
A}. Tanaji Cilliovangrfrlornl”‘the students saying that they
0 0’woul’-d.’su.ppiy.theml Vquevstion papers in advance.
to the above allegations made
0 against the said accused No.1 and the present petitioner,
is accused No.2, and the maximum sentence of
¢—«~(“””””‘