High Court Karnataka High Court

Chandrashekar vs State Of Karnataka on 11 January, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Chandrashekar vs State Of Karnataka on 11 January, 2010
Author: A.S.Pachhapure
] Crl. P E5694/O9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 1 EH DAY OF JANUARY 20 
BEFORE V

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE A.s.PAc11}iApUiRjEi'¢_

CRIMINAL PETITION I§o';6694;rg_qggg:_"  _  " 
BETWEEN V i .

Chandrashekar,

S/o. Sidde Gowda,

Aged about 36 years, A  V_

R/o. Bagivalu Village,  A _ ._  A
Gandasi Hobli, Arsikere Ta}1uk;--»"    

Hassan District.  _   it i   PETITIONER/S

{Sri. Hashmaill Ii%'aé]aa,V:'Acfv§V):  g.  

AND

State     
By Hassan_ Extension 'I?oii.ee,
Hassan.  * V    RESPONDENT/S

 ..  (sriL;~3'«saj;§'sh_%_ R. (§irji.;_..HCGP.}

=I¢=i€**=i=

 ivcvfirfziinal Petition is filed under Section 439
C1°.1P".C. prayin.g to release the petitioner on bail in Crime
No.1.58[20.()E's of Hassan Extension Police Station. Hassan,

  now pending in C.C.No.183/2009 on the file of the CJM,
 "HAassan.-"for the offence P/U/S. 324, 392 of IPC.

 _'   °'TI1is Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this
   day, the Court, made the following:



'? Crl. P 6694/O9

ORDER

This petition is filed under Section

requesting for grant of bail having been 4′

offence punishable under Section_39..’?_ 4I’PC-I ”

2. The facts relevantgfor
are as under: ‘ V V’ V

The complainant’ – .. an V liiantorickshaw
driver and on 24.5.2t)0g} .AA_’.:VPv.lii,f(_1ceeding in his
autorickshawy and near
Holenarasifanrmӣf;irc1.e.i passengers in his
autoriekshaytviiiantli Kkfereviproceeding on the way, a
passenger’ to stop the autorickshaw

and after’lalightir;ggA7frozn the vehicle, saying that they

thellrnoney for payment of hire charges. went

‘away._and amongst them returned and while the

com’plainanjt yvas cleaning the front glass of the

autoriciishaw, one amongst them held the complainant and

“..flthel’=outhe’r ciosecl the mouth and all of them snatched from

— an amount of 125.800-O0, a golden chain weighing 15

” a golden ring and mobile phone. Though he resisted

K

3 Crl. P 6694/09

the action of the said persons, they caused the assault and

injury to his forehead. They gave a threat to finish’

later. they went away from the spot. Th-e’:’_

approached the Police and submitted. a c.-ompia.int.Von:’th”ese ‘ ; it

facts which came to be rezgistiered

investigation the chargesheetvnhas beenp_laid.ih_p

3. The petitiorier isiiininocent and
not committed any not appear in
the complaint» he to abide by any
conditions iby the Court for his

release ‘¢rrba.:I:.,

4. it counsel,_l*or”‘the petitioner has also filed a

Meme’ “stating’~ the petitioner will attend the Police

fliStation mark his attendance twice in a week and that

for relaxation of this condition till the

case.__is disposed of before the Court below.

” The Government Pleader opposes the petition

~ stating that there is recovery of the stolen articles from

“the petitioner and that in case, if he is released on bail,

of

.1 Cr]. P 6E394/G9

there is every possibility of he committing such offences in
future. On these grounds, he has sought for the

of the petition.

6. I have heard the learned! connsel’fgo1’VAt’11.e”petitioggisr i’

and also the learned Government Fiehaider.

7. The offence nnder :gSect’ion«,39#’IFtT._is_.punishable
with imprisonment of be seen from
the allegations in of Rs.800–0O,
a golden the mobile was
anyhow, as could be
seen from. .A -i made by the Government
Pleaderlthougli it is more than what has

been’mention’ed_hin the complaint. Any how, that is a

fivinatxter will have to be taken into consideration

of the trial. So far as the safeguarding

the”-..inte»rest’~V’ of the prosecution is concerned, the same

‘”‘-‘~.__V.–.~9u1d :done by imposing some stringent conditions. In

gri’the._ci~rcumstances, I am of the opinion that the petitioner

_is__§entitIed to the bail sought for. Hence, I proceed to pass

the following:

5 Cri. P 6694/O9

ORDER

The petition is allowed. The petitioner is to

be released on bail on his executing a perscsnalvhonxd’ 5

sum of Rs.25.000-00 with two snreties for j it

the satisfaction of the Court concerned iisnlbjecti
following conditions:

i. The petitioner shailfiappevar and ~xnAarli his
attendance._._”:before;_» Extension
Police, Hassan-, on every
Thvuxisday V’ heztween 08.00
a.,«ni; . the memo
1: ‘V”t1;e’i’i:’~o_eiins’e1 Vivgfoir the petitioner

“” ” this’VVii’nvdertaking, he shall

= »sfoi1*._re’lax”ation of this condition

A L till the of the case;

The”V–..pVe_t_itr1oner shall not cause any

_th_reat, force or coercion to the

“m*o_secution witnesses.

A Thvepeitition is accordingly disposed of.

JL