IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNA'I'AKA
CIRCUIT BENCH, GULBARGA
BATED: THIS '§'HE 20:1: DAY 01? AUGUsff.Iéi){) 3%L[~--
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE 'Xf. ;IA€}AfeNgif§;§;1¢'AkT%,,, f
cm. PEFFFION'V1§Q,_226{;U'2O{}8 _"
BETWEEN:
1. Raju Gouda
S/0 Guduma
I2/at Ya1£!;ix;,'VT€i§if~'>hc*3';:s.19Lifl"'J 4'
Dist: Gu Eba:.'.g&.. v- '
2. Sangaiaagcmda
S/0 Shckharagquda 'fibsamaxxi
42'? years, R;r"at'Ye1g2'
'?§:ii~ h.orapur,"I}'i-st:' Guibarga
' .~ V ig A ' "c§:_:d3. Hosamani
" ._ I319 Shfckarggouda Hosamani
285 years; {Wat Yew
Tq: Svhorapur, Dist: Guibarga
" V 1 .'...PE'I'ITIONE}$
' Prabhuiing Navadg Assaciates, Adv.)
AND:
The State of Kamataka
Through its Statien House Ofiicer;
Shorapur RS. 1
Shorapur
Dist: Gulbarga
R/by its S.P.P
High Court Builcimg
Bangalore 560 001. _ "
A ".~....\.vRESPONDENT
(By Sri. Sharanaiyasapya§{..,VE.é§h£§héttj!','»~:}if§GP}
This praymg ta
enlarge théé C.C.No.45/07 new
converted iI1*Ld'[vS. §;-.»N6'ii128,/G-? '-or}. &ti1<~:"':file of the 19.0.,
FTC., Yadér, -which .r€:§_S?.:ert:d for the ofiences
punishable maer. se.c:t3eé:s_ %1L43{ 147, 243, 341, 324,
326, 504, 506, 30:? and 'v30i1s'- r/w sec. 149 of IPC.
"'co_m3'ng on far orders this day, the
V V c0t1rtL"1:1ei:i;:"IQ1iii;W:i11g:
ORDER
tfle ieamed {.:om;.se1for the petitioners and
Gcvemment Pieader for the State.
>/’
I
2. The petitioners are among the 20
persons against Whom 3. case was ‘V ‘
Cr.Ne.238/{)6 by the Shorapur vpeficc V
punishable under Sections 1»cié*2*,_V4%%’ :43;
324, 504, 506, 30?, 302k’z.~jw_} 14A?€i.__0i’.VVIVl3?_:(3V”:~–:4fV:i”1″1c3«”jthe ‘ A
complaint allegations’ izgto of the
previous pofitica} complainant
geup and thg Vvj€é2t”v§%;V;%;”:itioner herein,
can 30. I family was
and when they were
ail C0m ing mad, ‘at about 12.15
p.121 the acééasfcd by the is: petitioner herein
V’ tfigs goup Wi’::h SIQIKZS, sickle,
:.’é;£%§i’_:t31ey abuseé the complam’ ant party and
” 1*’ petitioner hareixx namely Rajz: Gnuda
A3′ Sanjaeva Raddy, and other {we petiticmers
A6 ané A’? caixght held of Sanjeeva Reddy and an
.« _Har§count of savers biaws gven, Sajaeva Raddy diet}. A
compiaifit was Eadgedxby the fatfxer cf the deceaseé.
3. Having regard to the nature at’ _
alleged and the manner in K V’
to death and the petitioners hertiifi .’
the incident and petitione1%_V:vL”2.. lg:
petitioner to ensure: ” is..m”:1rdered,
in my view, the to bail, more
partictflarly V$ie1*i0us nature
attracting as punishment
and merefQm–~.gi§§it xi’ friis is likely to
hamper tliii ef the evirience
and Witnesses catinot be ruled out
iiii iiezastins, the bail petitian is
r6je§f¢df’._ J
saié,
Iuégé