High Court Karnataka High Court

Raghu @ Raghuram vs State By Banaswadi Police on 9 October, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Raghu @ Raghuram vs State By Banaswadi Police on 9 October, 2009
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
BANGALORE be

DATED THIS THE 09"' DAY OF OCTOB;ER_é2'i}'(_E3.' " 

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE EU1,EvAniio;EAn1EaE'

__(_:___R1M1NAL PETIT1_O.N Nogsen 0i?"29e9oo  J

BETWEEN:

Raghu @ Raghuram,
S/o Sri.Oi1MunisV'w.amy:;' . _   
Aged about      
Residiilg at: NI5-_'3V7i'~1;'3'--.__ V      '

Kanak.adasa':AiLnS/oiieé.  " 'V

Lingaijajapilrarig..__  %   . .

Banga1"ore¥56GO84;.'" ':2'  -_.  E "  ...PETITION ER
(By Sri.Naii'swhad Pas1ia'v&'}5:rssociaies, Adv.)

  Snare eyeaaifiagawadi Ponce. ...RESPONDENT

(By.._Sri,__Ho.nnappa, HCGP)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of
“‘Cr.’PIC. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime
i\3o.233/09 of Banaswadi Police Station, Bangalore pending on

M

the file of XI A.C.M.M., Bangalore for the offences
P/U/Ss.l43, 307 1″/W 1.49 of §PC.

This Criminal Petition coming on for orders.’tliis9V’d-afy,.V’the
Court made the fo_1lowing:- it it *’ ‘

Petitioner has sought for ig:ra:n–t_9″of ircgiularz

connection with Crime No.233;’C9″.of Banaswa.di’_: the

offences punishable und’er_Sectitons r/uh/99S’ection 149 of

EPC.

zine gm 26.4.09 around 2.30 p.m. a

complaint has been’Vlodged”‘alleging that on 24.4.09 around 7.30

in egveni-nng when'”the complainant along with one Balu and

were talking near the park road at that time

one-..__Ragh’u.VifAinil and other accused persons came there and

Viraissed quarrel with the complainant and assaulted him with

‘c_l9u’bsiiand knife causing injuries on the complainant. When Balu

“and Anand intervened to rescue the complainant, they also

9/

La)

assaulted them with club and knife on their heads. This

petitioner is said to be accused No.1.

3. Heard.

4. It is the submission of the leai<ri'ed'tt»Cot1:n'sel iforlthe
petitioner that petitioner is ha_ndi:cappe'd and ithat':.'there":is no-V

overt act against him.

.5″.i”Learned;’:£}oVernmentA’Pleader has submitted that the
petitionerlhas assattlte’d.._t’l1e,:l’c0mplainant from the dagger and

that he hasit’heVdisatailityl ihfrespect of only left leg and that itself

is sufficient to lcoiisider the case of the petitioner for grant

of_ehail.,.l\_A ~ ”

.. 6: “Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the

‘r_:ase’,: petitioner could be considered for grant of bail after three

‘§§_aU,/

months from the date of this order, by the concerned Court by

imposing suitable conditions.

7. Accordingiy, petition is alioweed.

Bkp.