IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 157'" DAY OF DECEMBER 2010
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE NANANDA
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos. 5782/2010 c/w K
Cr1.P.NO. 5782/2010
BETWEEN:
1. Renukaradhya Sharma _
Veerabhadrappa '
Age : 40 Years
Occ : Business
R/0 NO.10, S.R.Nag;i'1*._
Bannerghatta Road E' 'M E' f
Anekal T aluk V H" V
Bangalor e .D'is£,r..1'et E '
2. Sridhaifl' " _ _ 1 "
S/oslate T.Cropa1
Aggie 60 Years sssss
A One E."EB1isiness
' V 0 V. 1839._
vLGBv.C»Q1oriy,V--v''
'' .R:£Inai1éjthfipuram
"Frichy'R,Gad
Koimfiatore. . . JDETITIONERS
5f{Bxy;s;i.c.H.Jac1hav, Adv.)
State of Karnataka
By Samparlgiram Nagar Police
Represented by the
State Public Prosecutor
High Court: Building
Bangalore -- 560 001. ...RESPONDENT
[By Sri.Vijayakurnar Majage, HCGP)
Cr1.P.NO.5778/20 10
BETWEEN:
Basavaraj
S / o Shivarudrappa
Age : 33 Years
Occ : Business
R/o No.44/1, 5″] Cross ‘
S.R.Nagar
Bangalore — 27. _ V
[By Sri.C.H.Jadhav, Adv.)
mi): 1’
State of Karnataka
By sampangmm 1\T}agaI’~Ffo1ice.
Represented ‘.:}f1″e_”l _ E _ h’ ‘ ‘
State P1,1T31ic- Pr0»seC1i’tOr–.
High Courtsfiuiglding ”
Bangalore — 56.0 ‘O01. ‘ …RESPON DENT
V. “(BY ajfaliumlarlllhdajage, HCGPl
‘V are filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C
praying tolerglarge the petitioners on bail in the event of
‘,their arrest in Cr.No.180/2010 of S.R.Nagar Police
Bangalore City, registered for offences
g._lpt_tnishable under sections 408, 420, 381 r/W 34 IPC.
These petitions coming on for orders this day, the
it E Court made the following:
oR§eR
The petitioners in Crl.P 5782/2010 are the Ex-
employees of M/s.Ovion Lifestyle Company. The
petitioner in Cr1.P 5773/2010 is an Ex~partnerVV.olt_:th_e
said company. ‘ d It
2. On 27.10.2010. the Managing Pai’tner:riamge1ly: ” «
Kiran Kumar lodged the first
jurisdictional police alleging’l_o’ff_ences.
Sections 408, 420, 381 ..’ll’hev._Apetitioners
are ‘arrestfi’ ‘ ‘
learned Counsel
for petivtionersangdv-. learrreld Government Pleader for the
have”””been taken through investigation
rel(:Vords;,”‘in par_tieu1ar the first information, which would
reveal allegations made against the petitioners
3u””–__V”relates. to-l:’internal disputes of partnership firm and also
_ ‘dispute in relation to the manner in which the business
wliich earlier carried on by the firm ‘ ‘ ” was split up
in January’2010. The allegations also refer to the rights
W//,
7\i 0″} I 1. x
of an outgoing partner to start a business of identical
nature in his own name.
4. Therefore, without going into further details. the
direction sought for is granted for a limited
enable petitioners to seek regular bail.
5. In the result, I pass the fo.s.. Bangalore City
* for offences punishable under
408, 420, 381 r/W 3-47 I.P.C., they shall
if released on bail on their executing bonds for
a sum of Rs.25,000/~ each offering a surety for
the Iikesum. 7″\*. C’ * ‘1’-“\ ‘\~r«’/M
2) Petitioners shall not intimidate or tamper with
the prosecution witnesses.
3) Petitioners for the purpose of
shall appear before the InvestigatifigVC:i’fi.oer,”
whenever called upon to sort I
4) This order would he-..operatiV”e VfoIe.’v’al_perioc’fi of
two months from time,
petitioners before the
jurisdictional ‘Tan event, the
,tiéarnéd.jfidgé’¢ftheffihfisdumnnaai(xnin;shau
‘eorisider ‘ A ‘:.bai1–. arpplications mthout being
– .. bjf-ohservations made in this order.
§d/’-~
IUEEGE
~ ‘T3