High Court Karnataka High Court

Channappa S/O Yallappa … vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 November, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Channappa S/O Yallappa … vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 November, 2008
Author: Arali Nagaraj
IN THE men COURT 013' KARNATAKA.   i 1  i[%% C % M  A.
cmcurr BENCH AT DHARWAD' "      73¢  
DATED THIS THE 4"' DAY OF  &  T.  T T %'
BEF();_{ };.._,    X   %

THE HON 'BLE M1;  

   

BETWEEN: V 

Chamappg __  _  :1' '
Kaflannava;'.,VAgc§;1abr3ti£  ._ 

30 

R/at Rladiikoppa \liI1ag'e,_    .

Taluk: Ramdurg  

S!Q,§fBhi1nappé Dcsaigo udar,

' ' .,  about 42 
 % 09¢: Agriwxltare.
 . raga: K,fié1ikdpp§..Vfllage,
Taiuk  Dist. Bagalket.

  Nagappa,

'   nKa1ian'z:.2ivar,
* Aged about 30 yam,
" _ '   (')c{::' Agdculttsre,
*  R/at Kadiikoppa Viilage,
  'Taluk Ramdurg Dist. %a¥kot..

(By Sri.B.T. Kulkami, Adv.)

.»~--r""""~/"

. . . Petitioners.



AND:

The State of Karnatalca

By PSI Kemr,

Taluk Badami,   
Dist Bagalkot, 1

Rep. By HCGP, Dharwad.   '    L

This Cfiminai Petition is 515:: sa:r:;m%438'%%¢fkc:;p.c % %

praying to grant antioimtory bail in th§_Ve1;¢n1_»of  of pietitioners
by the Kerur Police in view. b£_Kemr RS, Crime No{l2$ of 2098
pa/u/Section 379 ofIPC.  7 7    " 

% This c:imsaa%1j%% r§r orders this day, the
Conn madejhe f<5Hof§§(ing3"f:4 4   

T!1eVp_etitiVr$i:.:%:1's'  are respectively accused Nos.1 to

 C1;ii;i:te2,.A'-»:b1o~;125&003'"bf Kern: P.S., Taluk Badami, Dist.

  punishable under Section 379 of K have

V saught   bail under Seciion 438 of Cr.P.C. This

  L is z eirporsedéi' by the lcarned HCGP by filing written

'4 2. These petitioners-accused axe alleged to have committed

  theft of 10 mtrs. long telephone wire worth Rs.3,000/-, therefora, the



said cxime came to be registered agajns: them. Theg?fi'ea§¢7%u%m§e: 

Section 379 of IPC is punishable  n1a.);imum '  £33.

4? .

imprisonment of three years or fine.   

petitioners in the bail petition that  pen. "1: at V

the addresses shown therei§§"'~V.a1*e   "fiiei;-efore, the
apprehension of the   their liberty, if
they are gamed"    *  imposing suitable
conditions.   the offence maximum
  and the value of the property

alleged to ha§?e~  fififéfi  petitioners, I feel that these

pctiticanersjéifilésaxwe 1;-gal under Secfion 433 (sf Cr.P.C. Hence

tAI1e:_Vf§l;10'tI:(ing»T_;  . %  «  °' v ._ _

ORDER

‘m herehy afiowed. ‘I’he petiticmers-accused

ieuniarged on ml, in we event of their arrest by the Police of

in Crime No.I25/08, on each of them furnishing a self

for a sum of Rs.25,0&0/— aloag with a surety for the likesam to

gm”

the satisfaction of the Police Ofiicer arrtzsting them. The

shall compiy with the following conditions :

(i) They shall not directly or indizxepfily ‘4 2

the prosecution evidence ad:sh§lE f;l1§3{_.thr6ate:éf-..§_A
the prosecution vIimesses,__ A 2

(ii) They shall appear berm-m§sHo offhe §;éciV”i?V S;’
within two weeksfmm, ._fim§i’s7h”-bail§ in
terms ofthis ordé”r. _

(iii) They shag: co-agxé-sxtge 1.0. during

of ‘ ”

A copy of this om-,– [be to the Court of the
learned Dist. .9; sessioas Judge and to the PSI of Kenn’ R8. for

…..

% M V Judge