High Court Karnataka High Court

Naveen Chandra Mantri vs State Of Karnataka on 29 July, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Naveen Chandra Mantri vs State Of Karnataka on 29 July, 2009
Author: Subhash B.Adi
-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE -

DATED THIS THE 29"' DAY OF JULY, 2009

BEFORE

THE I~ION'BLE MR.JusT1cE SUBHASI-I 3.43: I   " 

ggmgwgg PEEITIQE go'3194zm_o§ :"%j '  
BETWEEN:     

1 NAVEENCHANDRA MANTRI ,  ' 
SfO $12: VIPINCHANDRA BAf)RI!§1ARAY;ANA V
MANTRE, AGED ABOUT 24 vEAg>s=,%. 2 . T 
R/AT INERANAGARI, SNEHANAGAR, .I§iAND'F.D,

MAHARASHTRA. ~ V
 PETETIONER

{By Sri : K saasgi1<:R2gI~is§HE;*:§:*&*--;1'@v.g

»
P

1 STATE 01?. Q   '
BY: isd;AHA{}EV2X'i?£JRA--»._ "w__:.1c1«; --STIfA'E'ION
BAl'}'GALORE»_ * = '

REPRESENTEL? 

    RESPONDENT

(_ By sfi,B;3AL}iKR1sHNA, HCGP.)

‘VA_{iRL..»§5:A«FI.i;EAD U/S1439 cm>.c BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE

VPETETIVGNEP, ‘I-ERAYING THAT THIS HOIWBLE COURT MAY BE

PL§§’.AS-‘JED T0–«_GF=?.A-EFT REGULAR BAIL TO PE’I”£’I’IONER IR CRIME
NO.I61′;’V20O9′-DFEMAHADEVAPURA POLICE STATION AND SET

AS§DE1′–~fi’Hi”1.t3RD»ER OF THE FAST TRACK COUR’I’–III, MAYO HALL,

BANGALORE IN DISMISSAL ORDER DATED 7.7.2009 IN

_._ ;’:v.-‘.._CRL.MISC.N(3.25549/2009,FOR. THE 017-‘FENCE P/U/S 304(3) AND
= safe ~:2.;xa§: 34″-op me.

‘THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE

” f_ ‘~E;”.{;71.UR’I’ MADE THE FOLLOWING:

-g-

ORDER.

Pefitioner is accused No.1 in Crime – No. 161/2009
registered by Mahadevapuxa police. Bangalore City, on
36.4.2009 for an ofience punishable under Sections

1″] W 34 of the IPC.

2. Case is Iegistered against seven accuse-dc: of the –« ..

prosecufion is that, the deceased,’ X

28.4.2009, on account of the hazassmentefll-ueatfieefitg L’

and physkzal torture by the huebaeeeeee

3. Learned counsel that, police
investigated the matter sheet. In

support of note of the deceased is
also ;~eeenieeL It is deceased has kept the death

note stafing i1obcd3A;’–._ie’1:es;:>onsih1e fcr her death, which is

‘V

._ for the petitioner also submits that,

the’ eeéher of the deceased did not alleged anything

against the sin-laws or the husband, however, as an after

on 30.4.2909 complaint has been filed.

5. Since the charge sheet has been fiktcl and the

investigation is complete, on imposing the condition to ensure

his presence, he could be enlarged on bail. %

-3-

6. Accordingly. the petition is allowed. The pctifioner is

enlarged on bail subject to following conditions:

3) The petitioner shall execute personal bond for
Rs.25,{}0-O/– with one surety for the likesum
amount to the satisfaction of the Conn.

13) The petitioner shall not tamper with ‘Cl

prosecution witnesses or the xnatcrial cvid§:%:_1cé;” 5 f

c) The petitioner shall appea_1T~»b§:forc”

regularly.

*AP/ —