High Court Karnataka High Court

Mohammed Furkhan S/O Mohammed … vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 September, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Mohammed Furkhan S/O Mohammed … vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 September, 2008
Author: Ashok B.Hinchigeri
 - __E$AhiGAL{--JRE.~'

IN ':35 HIGH CQURT or-" KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE W my 0!: SEPTEMBER, 2608  

BEFQRE   L   W %

me Hemmé MR, JUSTICE ASHOK 3. HINCH.Ié$.RI:'A..::: 

cm... P511110»: M93525 s§f=m2 éQ3    " A  V'

BETWEEN    

MOHAMMED FURKHAN
$10 MQHAMMEQ IRFAN

mm ABSUT 23 YEARS

No.25, ALFDRD smsmg,

RICHMAND mwm   «
BAMGALQRE %    %   

(mow 1:4 cg NT%R;::; ?!3li1S€)N£%_,..PA,R,£x!?PA¥\§E'éA.._ 
AGRFWARA, BA£*3GALG¥%.E   
UT? N0. 3106/12003 V » 

 . PETITEQNER

(BY V5521 M'1*'~NAe4A;A.H &'semsKARA9PA ASSQCIATES)
         

THE'$Tf$TE Q? »:s;Aars:ATA_KA
av ASH{}!(?v3AGA_R«V.PC!,'i§£:E~~ STATIQN

   Respozuaem
 V (BY sax HONNAPPA, rm?)

4.  " »,'V¥"§'*§1'.'.'..'~.§__ CRLQP IS FILED U/5.439 CRIRQ BY THE ADVOCATE FQR

  'THE "PETITIGNz'ER PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETR. ON BAR. IN

V VfgC.€_.i'$_0';f£4'}'36/G8 (391 THE F'IL€ OF THE XI ACMIVL, MAYO HALL UNIT,

   . ELDRE (CR.NOv15Q!08 OF ASHQKEEAGAR RS") WHICH IS REG9. FOR
  V THE'@Ff?ENCES'F/U/5.394 0F IPC.

" THES PETETIQN CGMING ON FGR ORDERS THIS QAY, THE

 Qyouizrr was THE FOLLOWING:



9.3.1

The respondent has registereé Crime 

against the petitieraer and two ethers for the cffences:. {;sz1§i’%S:haAb3ég”

under Section 394 cf Incfian Pena! Coda: I?:..4E’$fivéiigfiedvt’!*za:,_’_§h.gT

cempminant Samrat Cheudhary afz€i__ §1¥S “CV;0D§V§EQE,.’:3!f§

Ramaswarny were attacked and rebbéé..§§f theif”ba’!V§:::_nvi:§in §;s in the
intervening night between “«2O98VV§$AnVAvvi(ingston
Read. The sessions cqurt, 1:§,,§_ guey, 2908
éismissseé the pe;_t!ii’§,zez*::’§:”5::3–.A bafi in Cri.
MisceilaneouséNQ_.§§SV§82««.§%’V;2*.Q§éS”L-….___ — ‘

2. Sri senior ceunse! appearing
fer__M/3. :’~a!.a:’:a’i.Va§’s …é_§is§s:oci’§$:ti:’c;:s fer the pefitioner submits that
identifyéng the accused dees net

w§th$:t”f;:;7d:T’_f:§iAe”éf;«;y;;t§»%iy*:’cf lawn in supgert ef his submissiens, he

V’; E alVs_re!§ec!”~en .–,a5 gfigifiment ef the H€>r:’ble Supreme Coazrt in the

pi _1mi:@:iu;.;Aa4 GAMARAM eemm: v. S’!’AT£ as

repcrted in (1982)). $69 2’09. The reievant

sf the said judgment is extracted hereinbelew:

€9.31-J.

M.$.A. exemirzatiens mar the pamicuiare regarding tlne_;se::4;’_>T:1,.v;.vi

year M.B.A. examinatiene are breught be my netice.

6. in a case of thie nature where….there_*’ié”p*§’i’§né’*fe:f:ie_V

exzieence against the accused, bail E15,;

Hewever 1» gxpressiy reserve the !ib’:%§t’y….te tube V}1eti_tiTe:§j’¢§,»§ ~.g.;,2V .mev§ _ V >

an appiicatien fer the grantef ter!f;;iiV>’jAi*er}>*V.,_VE3a¥§”ferivghei iimited
purpose of appearing fer the !5e%;e.at§.Lyea:r examination by

furnishing the necessary perftic’u»!3jrfsV;’eQ,e§9§9!§’n§’«”:?é!’e ciearing the

first yea; p2é’rtieu!ers regarding the

cemmencemeh; ef the éeé:’enl3v.§!’e~e:”fi!\!.B.A. examinatien.

7, T?1§e~ epgetimikeeis éisreissed subject to the above

et§e_e?v’et§Aé’£:{.e§:¥i “”” H
. V _ , ‘ ._ Sd/.-

Iudge