High Court Karnataka High Court

Maniyamma W/O Basavasetty @ … vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Maniyamma W/O Basavasetty @ … vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 2008
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT 

DATES) THIS THE 14*" my ot= AususT,2:$c%a%%*}%F[%   

BEFORE   

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE Monmk si4,§r~:TAr'2Ae%c2z;o%,4§%%i%

 

BETWEEN:

1. Maniyamma

VV/o.Basava;ac2~t§:y--{@  V' " V
Aged35ytéa.1fs _ ,   =

2. Basava:nn.9V.@' 
Basa¥:a--se1:t§r«_ 'V V -»::, .«_
"   
Agedlé-O'--yeaIs " -~ %  V'

Both aré fiat  Extn.
Ka}kunike," Ivhmsur Taluk
Mygzxom Dist. ~  _ , .. PETITIONERS

V.  ~    £s.. Pati1, Adv.,)

  

_ Statéof Karnéntaka
 ',By thc~SPP
;  _}?I.igh  Buildings
gfiangalorc-1 .. RESPONDENT

A.V.Ramal§1’ish;3a, HCGP}

,..2..

This Cri.P. is filcd under Section, 438 of (3r.P.C. by the
advocate for the petitioners pmying that this Hozfblc Qgurt
may be pleased to reica:-we the petziticner an bail in tbs:

of arrest in C.r.N0.5/ 2008 of Hunusur Town I?’Q};i.’:::

for the ofiencc punishable under Sections; 420,

of IPC. M ._

This C11. P. <::m:i1:c.g on for oxiiers-AAt1«;é.s’ d;v£:};r,’ A’

made the f0l10wiag:- _

for the offence
pu.n;shab;¢u;;d¢:sect:ei.sm, 506 r/W. Section 34 of
IPC. , % % A A

filed undar ‘Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

bail to the p€titi0I1«BI’S.

‘A 2. v.1?i=.::fi’gf£:ié:;c:ncrs are Wife and husband respectively.

‘-It is aliféged that the first petitioner used to borrow

\r/)

,3.

money from the complainant and others for her

needs. The complainant paid Rs.27,000/- (Rs.

+ RS. 15,000] -) to petitioner No.1 for V’

Thereafter, the petitioners have:-1ef£”the

unheard off.

3. Sri AB. Patil, ‘e’ieeAew3cate’e’

appearing on behasf of me&e.pctieorers siibmite that in
the complaint it is tisaii; borrowed

the money V” there are no

cleeurizents .. the rnonetaxy transaction
betweee the eemp1aman’ 1:. The eaici

submission is’ V–.1J;e.e&;<.:e;3table at this stage. However,

»A to the nature of the allegations made

agaiI1st'j3efifi0ners, in my considered opinion,

of will be met if the petitioners are asked

V' » tci Leurrender and execute the bail bonds. The presence

A' ef ti1e petitioners may also help the Investigating Officer

V

between 10.00 mm. and 2.00 p.m.

to complete the investigation in an effective mmmer.

-4.

Acttorditlgly, the following order is madczw

Pctitiollers shall surrender fgtzfore
Ofiicer Withiti four weeks :’i’.(L;dE.l$T-..

sunenderl arrest. the petiticrm.-,_1_’s 3lie3_1 “bc: or; ;

subject to

(G)

V, “53.

the following _

Each af the bond for
a sum of%%..%gg.:5o’,b{}Q/;”~V,_ ffiifpées Fifty
orfiy} Euifh éurefiés for the like
‘sa;.i§fa;xi5;n:« §gjV_:tze Investigating

with the prosecution

Tlmg ‘a_I@_lI the trial Court regulariy.

mark their presence on every

~ fhe Inves tigaiing Cyfficer.

.. #2):

They shall no-operate during the course of

investigation

\~/I’

.5

(I) Each af {he petitioners shad} furnish cash
surety cf Rs.25,000/”(Rupees twenty five
mmmmfiamw

C-rimixlal petificsn is allowed accordiilgly.

sd/_
Iudgei: ¥\¢

*ck]- é