IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 10'?" DAY OF DECEMBER 2010
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MRJUSTICE N.ANANDAc:: A
CRIMINAL PETITION Nosesps it
BETWEEN
1. Harish 13.8.
S / o.Singrappa,
Aged about 26 years, .
2. Anand BS. ;
S/o.SingrappaA,_ _ V
Aged about 26-iye.ars.;:
Both a'riec'reS'i;din§?-: -- ,
Bettenahalli Vi] lage, * ~.
Kundana Hobli,
DeVanah.a11iiTa";*i.1k';.' ,_ _ '
Banga1ore"Ru"raV1V "District. .. Petitioners
v _ [B-jizjftieil.§sK:.Suhrarnaiiya and Assts, Advocates)
by
Vishwanathapura Police. .. Respondent
{F3y4SrVi;"\¢7ijay Kurriar Majage, HCGP]
it E' This Cr1.P. filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. praying
to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their
'''"arrest in Cr.N0.98/2010 of Vishwanathpura P.S.,
Bangalore Dist, which is registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 354. 323, 324, 448, 506
r/w. 34 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (POAJ Act,
1989 and Sections 3 8: -ii of the Indian Arms Act, 1959.
This petition comin
g on for orders this the
Court made the following:
The petitioners are arrayedfasil ac':_u"s_e'd '2:"a.n'ii.c.3
in Crime No.98/ 2010 regislte-red for.
under Sections 354,_ 323, :.34é}i~v,:._4i4i_f3, f5o6:,A§:/'VF. 34 IPC
and Section 3(l][X] orlfli-'gm of Atrocities}
Act, 1989 Arms Act,
fol' petitioners
and llearnied 3..-l3ieader for the State and I
have _been°'take.nithfiiough the first information given by
The 'allegation made against these petitioners
;oetifi.oners armed with deadly weapons had
gone house of victim to threaten her life. The
first information does not. disclose any motive for
-.pei_'iti'oners to go to the house of victim and threaten her
..,.life. Therefore, without going into further details, the
direction sought for is grated for a
limited eriod to
{SK "~ C.'.'(j\.- \ PL x ."'-aw
'\ .
enable the petitioners to seek bail before jurisdictional
Court. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
Petition is accepted. Petitioners .b
anticipatory bail, subject to following’
1} If petitioners are arrested1i_r1″lTrirn,e’
registered for the
Sections 35,4, 323,,3?24..rei48, 506-..r/Vxlv. 34 IPC
and Section’ l3.{l){::].ll¥”l§)f {Prevention of
Atroc-itjiesl police, they
llll on their executing a
Vll3«01;1(l of Rs.25,000/– each and
offerlirig a surety for the likes um.
«.2′}.,I}’et’itiQners shall not intimidate or tamper with
V A lfiielliprosecution witnesses.
ll .. The petitioners, for the purpose of investigation,
shall appear before the Investigating Officer,
whenever called upon to do so.
4) This order would be operative for a period of
two months from today, within such time,
7’\’ -~…,Qx»\, –\,. ,
4
petitioners shali seek regular bail before the
jurisdictional Court. In such an event, the
learned Judge of the jurisdictional
Consider bail application
influenced by observati.Qn.s_:i1aci’e’iii: K ”
iU@@E
Cm/~