Loading...

Edigara Narasappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 November, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Edigara Narasappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 November, 2008
Author: Arali Nagaraj
Cr1.P.E'~Io.'?3-46.(}8

in THE men coum' or KARNATAKA, K 

CIRCUIT ammo}! AT DHARW.AD_  I  A'

DATEB THIS THE 4*»: DAY or KGVEh9H} ER,  T' 

THE HoN'BLE MR..J13s'r1ci?:.~   ''

CRIMINAL PETIT10:ftNO.734€;['"2fi90§   

Between:

1.

The State of Kaznataka by PSI

Edigara i'éa.t'asappai,$ 
S/0 Seshagxpa,   _  V
Aged about, "'26 years; 

Fish V'_;3i(;do:i;' _ . '

:}?.Abdul§é;= .. . 

2::   

Agefid 'aha-u£V'i?,_4 yeaxf'S"_,=

V . Punctmxfi Shep, 

"&&wm, ' ~    

Sf O Béifl,di Basha,

  _Ag(_:€i ..s;ih(_:}1;-1; 35 years,
 V. R'/d'~Baa§1véna Pet,

.Sir§1gup}3a Taiuk,
 §ist.S83'3120.

A    §ri.Gode Kagaraja, Adv)

Szirigeri RS.

c'\..S~--~>"\----~-------'-\_,....

 A3 azrfresidents of Siriigcziri Village,

PET'I'I'IONERS

RESPONDENT

CrLP.No.’§’346,08

[By Sri.A.nand K.Nava]@znath, ECG?)

This geiition is flied unéer Sgetion L.
advocate for the petitioner prayinggthat tix§.s”«Ho:1’b_Ie’ .C:QuI’!; may

be plaased to miease the pctitioxxérs’ 0:1,
No.48/2008 of Sirigczi Poiict: and pcfiziing 011″” the ‘f1I€=-‘ (if £11.:
Civi} Judge (J1::Dn.) 6aJm§’C,”Sim_;1.guppaA. V j 7 –. ‘

This petition coming on 4E:’rV’erders,.”ih.i$’da§, the Court
made the following: V v

Pctitianatéréé.’ 3i respecfiveiy accused
N03,} to “Eirigeri Poiice: Siation of
for the offences punishabic
u/ss.3%5 have sought for ‘bail 11/8 439 9:’

the Qr._P.C. ‘V

‘A bail petition is seriously opposed by the

Prosecutor by f1li1:1g Written objections

_ tom.

‘ ” ; Heard the arguments of both the sides.

4. Eariicr t0 the filing of this bail petitien, these:

petitiom3:r3–accused had fzied their’ petition ujs 439 Cr.P.{Z.

(___~_____(\~.r’\,,z–\,

C;t1.P;Na.?3é16.C*8

beforé the learned Fri. Sessions Jzldgtf

Cr1.M.P.No.359/ 2008 and the same__c.arnc to’

S. 013 cagrseful reafiing ax.7::a:_A:iA§¢n’ts\
complaint filed by the very naxt1e’1jg _
couid be seen that 31:16″ has Véleat terms that
these petitio:1ers~accuseti intercourse

on her one aftcr.:§.t;<3ti1eifAb}fib uigtdér threat to her fife.

6. 1 ‘ counsel for the
gefifioxztfirstv .– tttat there has been delay of
about fzlays complaint and that the meclical

avidegxctt doééts _::1ot ..’c1isc16ét: that the victim was subjected to

scxuat intarééfiise and therefore the petitieners deserve

7;” is the settleé principle that conviction can be

Jtmsgd 0’21” tha mic: testimozuy of the gsrosccutrix despite the

t.«’x3;édicéal evidence not corroborating her testimony if her

% ..t:?:e:*.tin1<:a11y is found txustworthy and sufficient to prove the gufit

V' cf the accuseci beyond zeasonable doubt. Further, it is quite

natural in such cases that there would be some delay in filing

CIi_?.N{}.7346.08

the complaint because the vexy reputation sf

be: aéverseiy affected.

8. Sri.NagaIaj, the 1carne§fi.Vct)!,t1it;e}ttti§t% iir1:::
submittcici that it is not in ‘tpetitieneiéi

are permanently residing. at th¢_.;aria”‘mss¢s shé>wuAby}t11€m in the

(

bail petition?! as 31%;; suspected to misuse
$115? 133$??? if ‘@153? he has placed
reliance (.)I1:.tl’1§E 16.0′?’.2€}G7 passed in
the Cr}. t:téeVV’accused who was alleged
to hate’ ccxu.1tVnVtttt«3ti~’ 1113 3736 EPC was granted bail.
Sufiice $.t1§%* in the said case cannot be

eque1ta?u7L.w:ith tin: facts in the present case.

_ searious nature of the csffence alleged against

§34c:¥;~f.:é the material evidence ctuliecttzd by the

pmézrsgzitfiofi éuring investigation 8.21:} the clear statamaut ef the

” » bzfisgcttfiix that she was subjectsd to ftzsrcible sexual

iatemoume by thesa three petifloners 013$ after another, «@515:

‘ VV butweigh the fact that these petitioners are permanently

residing at the said addresses and thetrfi-fore they catmot 1136 said

r\.r”-‘x—-~

Cr1.P.’.\§Q_ ‘,.«’3«’i6’OS

to misuse the liberty if they are granted bail.

ft): the pfifitioners has net been ab.}e~tr)’ éshfixw 2:1-mu

accused persons could be falsely id}?
at the cost of her marital i’;<:;V'1
reputation. b . '

10. For the of thfi gonsidtzztd
spiniim that these dfi the grant of bail.
I-Emacs, tbs as being devoid of

merits.

Sd/-=
Judge

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information