High Court Karnataka High Court

Hanumanthu S/O Hanumaiah vs State By Ramanagara Police on 9 July, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Hanumanthu S/O Hanumaiah vs State By Ramanagara Police on 9 July, 2009
Author: Subhash B.Adi
ORDER

 

Petitioner is accused in Crime No.31i2009 Iegisteied en
2.3.2009

for the offence punishable under Section Sf}?
we. 4 j” l

2. Complainant is one Sri Arkesli:

eyewitness. He has alleged that, on :5;-v_s.eA.bo3.:tlV

morning near his shop, accusegleameh the V

deceased with £11011 rod. As a ‘l1eve”sustained

grievous injury and am. is ; §ts;:;¢;1fi<_hat. immediately

thereafter, the accused to the police

stafion.

3. “fie mjvestigafion, the police has
recorded tileetatemefif — of the deceased and also the

other witnesses?’ Wifeehelof lmé’ deceased does not alleged any

;_’j’ii1e¢.ive ‘e.5eeept st-atzlng tliéitllvshe came to know that, the accused

Further, as per éhe charge sheet. motive

,__v_ a11egeti silpefifioney is that, he assaulted the deceased
j’l~.._»_QnVe§1ccoun~tvef harassment alleged to» have been given by the
his sister i.e. the wife of the deceased, and no other

is ‘alleged against the deceased.

4. Considering the cheumstanees that the charge sheet
having been filed and the petitioner is also got injured-“in the

incident, he could be enlarged on bail.

5. Amordingly. the petition is allowed. ‘:pevtit:ione1~ V’

enlarged on bail subject to foiiowing ‘7 ‘ V V ‘

a) The petitioner shall execute:4’peisona1.b’bond “for ‘

Rs.25,OOO/~ with one folj the

amount to the satisfactionétof

b) The petitioner V } _V with the

prosecution witnesses. or the vmaiteriéllyevhidence;

e) The    before the Court

Scl/an
Judge