High Court Karnataka High Court

Mallika @ Manja @ Manjesh S/O … vs State Of Karnataka By Tavarekere … on 30 April, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Mallika @ Manja @ Manjesh S/O … vs State Of Karnataka By Tavarekere … on 30 April, 2009
Author: Jawad Rahim

1:13 THE Hxeaceum GF L %
namnmmmn saw my oFApm,:2o::9: L

Bum

ms HONBLE L!”RJUSI’I}E RA}; % a %
9&1 Pew__:g;_n gr

Betwm
Manjam@Mam’a@
Max; 11

was ycar_a§–._ % A %
Riat Bgmi 1:: * “


H i 1". H  Raw ' ' 
 s6'a91%»A _    %
Hafiua --.  

Village, Chamara:*apams'{%%

J V’ {By

V — By’I’ava1-ek;eIFe Pciic.-3

‘ ” _ T med by
r ” Prcsccutar

.. R$m1ent
% % % é X % my Sri Raga submmnya am, Hem

N”

Mmmm !NlJ5.«?1>.h:mw.

UK”? 0? ¥(ARNfi£’ffi«K% H¥G!~i

– ”7 WU!” ..m…,».mm mm e.Mm<'I W KAWMAM z-em-e cam? W mmxxmm r-«my: ca

1*}

This mm petition is filed uis 439 §.'.1i:r..'I'..,C_3L;
thc Advocate for the pefitinner pt-aym mat H«3i'i'b1¢.[
SC No.198/20{B on t}:e_;f'z3:a of 1513

Court nmy be pleased as

Banmre Rural Dist:-iet and -$'f£3.1;»

This petition mming van

pzmom is :.$:.and is facing
charge for % f 1 Section
302 of the gumshabxc under

sauna' rm~14~3; :'i4{?;*§:.;1484. Ag'?»?ff#,{ 32.3, 324 at' the 1m
alang with 'm Seaainrxa Case l*Iz::.198
of 2903 Judge, Fast Track Court at

was suamsful in awum'

. undsr the provisiam :::f it 4-3? Cr,P.C.
' K which bmcfit he anjeycd.

M

§'t'g;¢5¢Wg1_£'Nz.. 2' Ewe-9vx,Iaw .» o, mm mm luv: … ..

"mm-mmmmm mama MKJUEQT OF KARNA°¥A%fi% Wfifi CQUR3" OF Eéflfiffiéflafflififik HRGH CWUEW G? Kfikflwlfiafififi HEGH

amengt omen' witnwaas. wife of the "

examned an 13.3 1.2fl(E.

6. ‘I% learned Sess$;;r1§ V.

petitiaxm as one of crfifi, held
that his aimence awn fia;i.a.: 6.ngl.e*V 1 him to

which aveA¢w’di12gV. – him from appear:-am

an .. dam mt dispute the

a:::r;:used-petmo” mm’ was regular in

mm iiad mt mama any impadixryanfé in the

pnsectztian has also not pointed nut

V A ‘ “may erf tha accusad which weave winst im
The my uthm man whack the mm

% Judge has shewn ma mjcct the bail is that as
u:therea1*ez:mretbananeam1meda.nda*neam’theathm–is

cf”

r>*%.W-Vmwm. \>’hA\’m.>vvIn.

“Kfi«RN&?fiKA HWH

W m.W.mmm mxwm Wm: W mmmmn mm mam’ as mmmmm mam mum W

alwmting csamequernt to which the trial is
Absence af athm cc-accused carmot be a _
the bail to tha pctitiottwr. as ;p¢:;t:g§ai
exphifi the chcummwé’

adwmce. Be that as it
m’1~.::L1m5tances and time cf
@3111: eff bail til! abcdimfly
mmplied desersm one
mczre circumataw,
wifimut: _’ vi’ the case but

‘¢xp1a.-med by the accused, I

nmcrzeappxscatsan

pafifinnmr shat? mum» a mu mu band

km a mm at’ Rs.25,00&f- with me surety ‘m

theI%esumb:: memmacmngzmmm
Svwsiorm Judge.

N”

M”°§.7>**%.i?’% ta mrsomueue an

~ mw » ~.g_m.g«:.»-»-.«= wr nnmmt-nu-\l\uWe WEWH mxum Q)?’ KARNAEAKA HIGH cmm” Q? i{ARN&’E’fi.¥€fi. HEGH CGUEQ? 0?’ §(ARN&”§”AKA MIGH

bi}

W1

He shall wtlarly atnmd the

prosecution. will

Ta sat at rest fin
the
trial, at the
in fifbeam

7.00 pm.

3. P¢t£’ £ior;”s¢:ar’1dfi tezufislfiw t.:rr-dam’.

Sd/23
Iudgg