%>
1 ,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT B;'%NG;€\J.,_C'Rf3_V
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY {BF JUNE ' ;; .
BEFORE _ 'V V
THE: HGNBLE MRJUSTECE _
CRIMINAL PETITION 1\f0.'A:'§$:'5 (i}F éi<3f\,i;_1;:., «. "
BETWEEN: " " '
1.
Manjunatha S/Q Naray_a:iasx>cam}n ‘ *
Aged about 25 §.?€a.rs, ” ‘
Residing at 4″‘ Maini, 5, _ _
15’ Cross, Lakshmaiah “B’1o:CK;«,
Ganganagaxfa, i’~Ja’ga1” ._ ‘ .. «’
Banga1m’~e:T;VT55o x
2. Cheihari / 0′
Agied :xbé>u-:: 3zéa–.rS» & .
:fResidi::’:gVat iéi 7″? Cross,
£ien1pegéaxfci.a ‘ Nagar,
Petitioners
[By M,/s. 134;”1;é5.\g§TI1e=.2.:*:sAi;521rV1Aé..}tnbers for Sri.Kernparaju,
Advigcafes}
Sfafe ef
By R.T’;Nagar Felice Staiion,
By ::s Sfate Public Prosecutor. ,,.Resp0nder1t
§Bj§ L’3ri.GJZvE.Sri,nixfasa Rssdcijg, HCGP}
This Criminal Fstition £53 filcaé under Secéian 4:39
‘ {ZR§lC; praying :0 €:n}}2~1rg€ 3:316 petiiiwzsrs on bai} 5::
C§’i.§’§3.€E: Na.436;’2Q1G sf R,’§’.E\EagaVr Poiice Statigrz,
B2:I1g§a1i}:*e3 Qt}? fer iihé i>f£é::c6:~3 pzzxzighszbie ::::<:1€:*
kw»
9
IPC.
Sections 143% 147′, 148, 307′ read with Seetio.i
This Criminal Petitien eoming for Leis’; ._
day, the court made the fe1i0wing;””‘
oRDee'””
In this petition fi1e<3z'»TL;f':.{;1Ver
the petitioners who :_}.1aV€ bee:1'1:__ar§aigf1ed: g§vvf%accused
N031 and 2 in .Nagar Poiiee
Station, Banga1ore,: , v_ " the offences
punishable. 148, 307 I'/W'
Seetieifg an order to enlarge
thenron1xfi1%e,fae«'
_ 2. The eaee'ofA§he~.-gjroseeution in brief, is as under:
a,b0u'e"1vQ….f}«O a.m. Gr: 23.12.2010 in front of
___Bakery situated in 4&1 Main Road,
{%angana–§,a:9,
Bangalere, when eemplainaat {}.Srir1iVaea
wee fifiezeleiéfig tea, these petitienere along with :3 others
A ferming" thernseives into an unlawfuj aesembly armed
igfiitfz deadfly weapene like ieng, <:=:;m::1iU:ed the acts; ef
aeeeuii or: said –$3"'i§3iVaSE'i €:§1i.:S§:{1g him: severe injuries,
*:he:*e%::§; the}? a§§',€"§n§Z}'{f:§ ':9 eemmii; {fie murder (3?
3
Srinivasa. In respect of this incident, sairr–S:ein_Ixias’aA
lodged a report at about 12.30 prnr
based on which case came robe r’egisiered_”1n.fCrirne«
No.436/ 10 against five V uniinowjn VV
investigation was taken two ‘
petitioners were appreijenae-d’ %.n*–co’nr1ectio:3-..udrh Crime
No.3{)/ 11 of R’T.Nagar for the
offences purrvisgfiarple and 402 IPC
and during tK2;?o”vr)etitioners said to
have the commission of the
offence for / 10 had been registered.
On i:he«}5asis_ of disclosure said to have
beeg; umade vnbjgthese petitioners, weapons used for
,Ac0rn1nissiori’«.of the offence were recovered and these two
I arraigned as accused Nos} and 2. The
pra,yerv_rnafj’.e by {he petiiioners herein before the learned
Sessions Jufige for grant of bail came to be rejected by
–.A§’n.e_.uE’earnefi Sessions Judge. Therefsre, the petitioners
,
rfiieee
S /
VA befsre this rtozxrr seeking relief sf hail.
at
3. l have heard the learned Counsel for’ _
the petitioners and the Eearned High V.
Pleader appearing’ for the respondenetz}- uf3tate’;— 4’Pe§f}1seld
the records made available,’
4. As noticedValgove,l”tElei_:’eon1.pla’int;”~was lodged
against 5 unknown the assailants
who said to l”;:2§t’v’.§3′ were all
unknown ifofflletleomplaint also does
not the assailants. Even
aeoortling these two petitioners were
arresteel Jficonneetion with some other
case ..’l’herefore,~the”basis for the prosecution to arraign
as aeeuseclvlnl this case was the alleged Voluntary
staterxnjentrv to have been made by these two
petition.ers*–.§uring interrogation in connection with Case
in Crirne No. 38/ l l. Though ae<:orc}.:ir1g to the complaint
allegations, the assailants were strangers to the vietirn
téut it appears cltzring investigation, ns Test
identification Parade was eondneterl for identéfieatien of
the petétisners herein as assailants. At. this stage. this
5
Court is of the considered opinion that ii1ereV”é;reVp”‘ri’o
reasonable grounds to believe the Cornplisgiiiéy
petitioners in the Cornmission oiféhe offerie’er’.fa11e’ged i-pr; hi
this case. According to the ijiieriicrfi “report?—..AfEiie
complainant had sustainedi_s”orne simple i:’;jui?iee..a:<rCi hefi'
was treated as out patie11ti__4_i:"':-T ie"riov.'n1.e1:eriai on
record to indicate are habitual
offenders inciulgirig e;e.tiirities. Having
regard to iheVre_'_r;reV"rio"reasonable grounds
to in the offence
allegeri, 'the opinion that the petitioners
are .é3I'1t'i'fiwF:g('irtQ' on bail. The apprehension of
the4p'r:2seei1tior1" ivith regard to the petitioners fleeing
833:1}? justice can be allayed by imposing strict
' ..5.g_Ii1 the resuit, the petition ie aiiowed. The
peti-tionei*s are ordered to be reieaseei on baii in
iiieohirieeiiéiri with Crime N94 No,43§,/1€2 of R.'iIi\iagar
"?oiiee Sraiiioni Barigaiorei siihjeci, fie {he foiieivirig
iZi{}IEé:i§'{§{}§SZ
6
(1) The petiiionere Shal} execute a___
personal bond for a sum
Rs.25,0{“}O/~ each with one
the like sum to the satisfactionxéif
learned Magistrate; ._
{ii} The petitioners
intimidate 0:; _4tam«pe_r’*– ”
prosecution xvitnezsees in .aI–:*y5
(iii) The .petitjG~r:ei*s,”‘-»..LA fO’r”~… …v’£::he
purpose V §3f:e’1neV’est%;ga£i0§1A:shall appear
before Officer
xxslexenever :::a1§e:§{ SO and (:0-
0f the
“” “W!Cééé&Q£’ j .?. H ;
hey, _'”sha11.’ appear on all
” the Court without
efafl anid V
Vv (v) ” .’I’__f;e;; shed} mark their attendance
.: wiVth the jurisdictional police on every
and 2591 of each calendar month
.”eMf1§;émeen 10:00 am. and 2.00 p.rn., an
V Conclusion of the triaeig
35?;
magi
ggga