State Through Khatak Chincholi vs Shivaraj S/O Hanmanth Rao Patil on 22 June, 2009

:9: THE HIGH comm' ore' KARNATAKA;'"'~~  " 
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA     

EATED THIS THE 22% I)AYV.OF»zJUNEM     

PRESENT "

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTIC§3~vK.SREEDHA}§ 'ré2Ax:3u 

 AND,j % _ A v
THE HONBLE MR.*~.fi;js151c§5 NAGARAJ

CRIMINAL APPEA]. %1vp;}4:~i§i3
BETWEEN:      

Statt: through      '
Police Stati(v);1__   32;, ,  V  "  

. . Appellant

{By S1i.Su1bhaV$1*1..Ma11§;pm;"Aé'd1.S.P.P.)

         

  Hanmanfla Rae Patil,
" .afggf., 1'5 y_¢ar§',"Occ: Agril,

  Ydijraj-.'_.'_'..Respondents
(By Sri.Sachin M.Ma11ajan,eAi'evQcat;3)"»__ V " 

by the  far  to set aside the Judgment
dated 21.12.2001 paeeee cm; Judge {Jr.Dn.) and
JMFC, A.BhaI1c'i""  CecI1§o.35e/1999 aoquitting the
 offences P/U/SS. 147, 148, 448,
42'zf,e  $506 R/W see. 149 ofI.P.C.

  Appeal coming on for orders this day,

 _s4121-zmanem eeo J, dekivered the foilowing-

JUDGMENT

(complainant) had lent a haI;:d~1oan of

to Accused Neal. P.W.2 demanded return of

loan. The accused got wiid and that 011 24.5.1999 at

«£3

accused are ganted mnefit under Sectian 4 of
The accused Shall execute a bai} V’
period of one year. The accused:-“s1}’a11
of Rs.10,000/– to P.W.1 for ‘V
and Rs.20,()O0/- to P.W.2 ta The

accused are men (me mn.m§:~?s ‘fi1:I1€ the amount.

APPQEII is aflowfifil.      V'