High Court Karnataka High Court

Shivappa Siddram Bidarolli vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 April, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Shivappa Siddram Bidarolli vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 April, 2009
Author: H.N.Nagamohan Das
IN THE HIGH COURT 0? KARNATAKA

CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

DATED "rs-us THE 3*" my OF Ar=R::L--,{é'o4o%éi%%é'%%   

BEFORE... 

HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE H.*N. :§iA$£§AM.fi)'H§;?J 

CRIMINAL PET'ETI ._  on Noi.:%.3§1gT%2oeig}%%%. 
BETWEEN: _ i x L    A
1.

SHIVAPPA s1DDRAr&T51pARoL%L:j,;% M
AGE: 35 YEARS, – 1

2. SIDDAPPA s1poRAnu4jszbai&%*<oLL:&;-% «M
AGE: 32 YEARS,T.__

3. GANGAPPA szooaixm sI§A%?;oLL:;”
AGE:.31YEARS,’ ‘ :

4. sA.arAsH1vfjé:Ic>a§R.AM B”I’DA«.9..GLLI,
AGE: :25 Ymas,

soMAuNG_ SAIL’;E)*R}AP!i’wv’B:IDAROLLI,
fi%iG=a:.2s YEARS, L ‘

5__ :3MT}’ .3AGAVV§’W/0 SHIVAPPA BIDAROLLI

ikAGE: 29kV’EA.Rs,

~ 1 . u”?.’;Sf4%F;._R;9§TFsEfi{WWA w/0 SIDDAPPA BIDAROLLI
% «Ac;-5: zjs YEARS,

$76; rm)§wA w/0 SADASHIV BIDAROLLI
‘A53; 25 YEARS,

aw”

9. MAHANANDA W/O ANNAFWA HARUGERI,
AGE: 25 YEARS.

ALL ARE AGRICULTURISTS,
psmxomea NOS.1 T0 3, 5, 5, 7, 9

ARE R/O CHAMAKERI, %%
“FAL: ATHANI, DIST: aezmum.” AND &

PETITIONER NOS. 4 AND 3 ARE t__ %
R/O SATTI, TAL: ATHANI,*_ X

9151′: BELGAUM. A” ‘ ONK’£RS ”

AND:

THE STATE OF KARn:A”fA:<fi.%_Bf*?:% k
AIGALI POLICE, REPRESE.NTEE21 3?»,
me 599, HIG}-'fvCOl§_RT B%giL1)I.fi:~G', % %

DHARWADi._" _ _ :RESPONE)ENT

(av sa1.'p%.%H.' C§(*.§AT'i{bHi'd:i_:f5Z<';"'HCGP)

?ETITION«COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,

THE goumr MADE THE FGLLOWING:

QRQER

~A’t:;>%’t’itioners were enlarged on baii under S.438
::r.P,;’:; -3;: cr:. Misc. 930.313/07. The jurisdictional police
.. Vt}a\}é~*A}1ow compieted investigation and filed charge-sheet
C.C No.948/0?. Thereafter, the petitionera filed a

petition under $1339 Cr.P.C. for grant of regutar bail, ha

6%”

Cri.Misc. No.48/2009. The Sessions 3udge..j’~urnc§_e~rVv the

impugned order, rejected the petitionr:«fii’e§–‘.i’tj’*b§,i-~…._§ne

petitioners under S.439 Cr.?.C».~~o.n t_hatr-v_Vt’iie_V°~

petitioners have not surrendereé

reasoning of the Session$V.J:v:Lid_ge braeed”e’nA*~§;irve.ju§égment
ef the Apex Court i;_r*:;.”i’~.iSEnI2..t_§VrV§V:,’:’=’i.’i?._ sgartixnuri smre or
MADHYA pruxoesn gm fi’;.tNVt:’:£)V”:i,.’.!-t!’E*V.’~{ff’.:’,’V:reperted in 2094 (3)
CRIMES 333§sc). rm-e.»;ere,r:rf;.gg; .n;§tejfist:flabIe ground to
interfere” and to eniarge the
pei~Vi__ti0nere’j’v–‘cn.._fvAi’bebiI’;:Qr:der I #439 Cr.P.C. Hewever, the

petittitonflerss ere’ :i.t§”ectyV.’.to surrender before the Sessions

figidge anc¥”t;§”?iiev’an appiication under 5.439 Cr.P.(:. fer

‘g:arri’.ot”:’egular bail. In such an event, the Sessions fiudge

of the same keeping in mind the eariier

‘”‘ent§.(E:i’9etbry baii granted te the petitioners.

‘V citisrrzissed.

“with the above observation, the petitien is hereby
__ _ _ “mg,
Sd/-S
Judge

sac*