High Court Karnataka High Court

Divyaranjan (Dibya Ranjan Jena) vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 August, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Divyaranjan (Dibya Ranjan Jena) vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 August, 2009
Author: Subhash B.Adi


are THE HIGH coum 09 KARNATAKA AT BAN’G.é;L<::%*;E;+L%~Ii f

DATED Ti-RS THE 34§h DAY O_EAL}GUST',"'2o.§j9: =

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. sU$Ts£;:–:=_ SUBHASH §3'.A[};§ V

cRL.P.No.3s?4'ai2eos Q
BETWEE¥\¥ _%

snnlsmnfifiyllluxluuunluu

1 QIVYARANJAN (DlBYA RANJANVJEN.-3) .
S/O.HARiSCHA1§DRA_ 5 _ =
CICZLNATIONALiMO?5*fJFZS{«MfiéCiARATH"ROAD
BRIGADE RC}AD'.«.Béi.h£QALCl.F_iE.._ %

2 MANSRAféé.Ab3'~@ W*§§éDGW @ MANAS5 RANJAN JENA

S!O.HA?RiSCHfiuND RA; RiAT;N{).37!.2.

MYSOREE R%13A{3,RV'f'AAN{)AHTALLi', BANGALORE

BOTH '¥"HE P'ETiTlQNE8S'A¥iE PERMANENT
RfO.R§NGAL!_ T;!\LUF€_, TAL'!C«HEFi CRCSS,

ANAGUL 9¥ST, QPJSSA

" ''''' PETETIGNERS

'«-w-nan»-wu'

1% 11-» *t%2–§E«:3T§»TE SF KAHNATAKA

. *-RVEPBY THE STATIGN HOUSE €3FF¥CER
' A;DUGOBi ,POL§CE STATION

V% ….8A¥\&GAi…0RE

RESWDNSENT

{By 821: B.BALAKRiSHNA& HCGP)

CRLP FILED {£13,439 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE F'7_OvRL' Ti-TiEf
PETFHONER PRAYIRG THAT THES HONf3{.E CCJi.J'F2'f* »MAY 8E
PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE PETRS. OR :'3AiL"iN«S3.,C.N€}Vi".?4?!23{}9;'1
PENDNG ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE FAS;T,T3'RAC«K. COUF§T~'§3£,A
SANGALGRE, F08 THE OFFENCES F'/UIS 399 AND 402'C3f"'!PC.

This petition coming on for ordefsfiwis day;–%she~cé,uri'1%nia:de the
foliowing: _ _ '
Wm 2.2.2

Petitioners are accusggd — 3"'a'nd:;'§: $f2008 registered
on 26.18.2008 by city' offence punishabte

under Sectian:3 99;F . '

2. The _case “‘~::vf_”i%’s,e,’;pr6sééLnVtion is that the Police on definite

i:1f:citmatiorv§:?_:i;%’e£j–t.:icxthe 356$’-*afid founé that these accused have made
preparaiirms» ;o’»;fomrnij dacoity. The accused who were apprehended,

‘ >..§eizure ‘wa$’ also ‘rfiadé. As far as the petitioners are concerned it is

_ a_¥§e§e§1 that”a;3:a:f§ ffém this crime they are 24359 invoived in other three

,: erirm’§jsVVa¥1dL*:e-;§wve§ry is aiso made. ,

3. The offence aiieged against the petitioner being *

under Section 399 and 4.00 me. this is not .3 ;~,ase %:a+’gré%:;:%”¢: £;aiI.’L-,_V ”

Acoordingly, the petifion is dismissed.

DKBJ