High Court Karnataka High Court

Mahadevamma W/O Late Basavaiah vs State By Hullahalli Police on 20 October, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Mahadevamma W/O Late Basavaiah vs State By Hullahalli Police on 20 October, 2010
Author: N.Ananda
 

95

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 20'?" DAY OF OCTOBER 2010.-'--.._»

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE N.ANANDA:  2  

CRIMINAL PETITION NC{'.4i38T,4_V2Q1Q   V  

BETWEEN:

1.

Mahadevamma W/o late Basaskaiah ” ~.
Aged about 48 years, ‘V
Residing at Akala Village
Hu11aha1liHoba1i ” ‘ – ”

Nan] anagud Taluk
Mysore DistriCt.».._

2. ChikkadeVd:fnnia”1@’EC-hi}§i~:atha§rarr1.ma

W / oi ‘iNage3.h. @ 1Vié1nd’3Tgi’
Ageda_ab_out ._ –

R/of Kavalande’Vil1ago”‘an–d Hobali
Nanjangudi Taluki ; =

Mysore Di’st_rictV.’,’– ”

A Nag’eS’h @..M§1ndVy”d’S/0 Siddaiah
‘ _ Aggzd. Vabout’- 34 years
V R’/of.I§av’a1an_c1e Village and Hobali
* AN’anjang’u.dA’7I’a1uk
Mysore District. …PETI’I’IONERS

‘E’B_y; sri oii~ish.B.Ba1adare. Adv.)

in -state by Hullahalli Police
V Rep. by Public Prosecutor
O High Court Building

Bangalore. …RESPOND ENT

(By Sri Vijayakumar Majage, HCGP)

2

This Crl.P is filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C
praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail V. ._in
Cr.No.131/2010 of I-Iullahalli Police Station. Mysore

district, registered for the offences punishable__”–ulnderl’2V

sections 302, 346 r/w 34 IPC.

This petition coming on for
Court made the following:

Q___R_12_E__13

The petitioners are arrayer_:l aslllaccusedil\lojsl.2V 4
in Crime No.131/2010 offences

punishable under Sections r/W. Section

34 of sheet has been

submitted. for punishable under Section

30-4~B_.O_f 1-s¢;:u’oi1 34 of IPC and also under

5.3: and 4 ‘t”h’ellDoWry Prohibition Act.

vTl1eVlA.l’.»’sec0nd accused is the mother of first

vvfiasavaraju. She is the mother-in–law of
Gowrarnma. Accused No.3 is the daughter of
.:’_”s.econd accused, accused No,4 is the husband of third

” ” accused. The marriage of first accused with deceased

Gowramma was performed about five ye

£:If,; prior to

orders _ti1is._’:d.ay;.: the if

I.’ e.

8.8.2010. It is stated in the first information that at the

time of marriage. there was demand and acceptaricefiof

dowry finfirst accused. Thereafter, accused§’i\l’osi_’}..:: _

4 were harassing and i1l–treating d.e’Ceasled””-iandll “‘

subjecting her to cruelty in coi1nec’tionl'<vi7itlh"'

demand. First accused is _
Gowrarnma. The allegations_..4.iria._de._ Jficused
Nos.2 to 4 are vague. that
accused Nos.3 vand_ 4 Village.
Therefore, l'I1atii_rAe_' allegations alleged
against jfietitioiiers : ' ~ provided thereon.

they are released Vonjoaiiii.

' In the restiltfllliaass the following order:

lF'etitionisjaccepted. Petitioners are released on

bail, *-s__ul)ject;'t.oA{following conditions:

x j 1).. Petitioners shall execute bonds for a sum of

Rs.50.000/– each and offer a surety for the

likesum to the satisfaction of jurisdictional

COUIT, {\.}_ &L/\..- .

2) Petitioners shall not intimidate or tamper with

the prosecution witnesses.


3) Petitioners shall reguiariy attend the     V'

 ::zag"a

mas.    .  V