High Court Karnataka High Court

Nagaiah @ Nagegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 6 June, 2011

Karnataka High Court
Nagaiah @ Nagegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 6 June, 2011
Author: C.R.Kumaraswamy


S
neighbour of the cempiainani: by name Narasimhagewda

and his son Manja came and rescue the cdmpiai.«n”a.nj”t.,_’her

husband and chiidren. Then; the com_§;’iain4a:n£;”—i’h’e–i’iW

husband and chiidren went in _a~~je_ep

different hospital. Hence, she;”=éha-s_d*r’eq{jesi:e’d

suitable action against the aecntised pie:’son.s.i’

5. I have edh’ten’i;s of FIR.

The injured is one Naxfjes_h’V, son. He was
assauited by§.aeeVL;’Vsed has assaulted
both the her husband. There is
ciear:.iove;+.e_ai.;is accused Nos.1 and 4.
With they were not armed with

deadly weapons. -__TAhere..-is a case and counter case arising

c>i.j:i:’7:)f3the__same”ie.<:i.d«ent. The counter case is registered as

at Yeiawaia Police Station against

"De'viamn*zaf,';_ Ramegdwda, Dhananjaya; Dayananda and

NadesVhg_and Ewe others It is diffieuii: to ascertain as its

is the aggressor' in this case, But from the Ceniients ef

Véhe cemeiaietf it is eiear that accused Ned assauited the

injured Nagesh, so atsd accused No.4 as~seu%t_e.d"'u
Nagesha and Remegowda wind arefhe sdr:*'end_:~hds:Vba«:}d __of'w

the c:dmp!amant. There is dear <i=3.zert.a:fA.i:five»§_eiV.:i§si

accused Nds.1 and 4. Therefdre; m,m~«,: view'V'VA1ebey'ar:é3 'note,

entitied for gram: of anticipe't'dfy bails'~.So*V'faf:§as other
accused are concerned;"§._ thatvvif: a fit case

to grant anticigsatory baii,-T-est

6. At this stage;-Seern’ed=,Cou_nse’i.for the petitioner

submits thee,he:i’?r;_te.n”ds1ate v§z.iVt§f:d’ra:’§~;é””£he petition as not
pressed in -‘sci’—f€g§ as ‘_a–ced.sed_”‘Nos.1 and 4 are concerned

and he has “am rY.«’1.:’€V”f”‘-…,C_> ttejthat effect.

7. V’*–,ftn-th’e~__re’;:d§”c;7I pass the foliowing:

“R4! _____ ORDER

fifis-.:::fr~%nf:inai Petition és dismissed as not pressed in

~re’speet :?fi_f..pe.,f:é’tV§.dner Noel and 4-, “Fhis Criminai Petitien is

a§E’E;::’wede.§’e”” respect of petitioner N032; 3; S to 9′

.Pee’:.iti0’r2*’er N032; 3, S ta 9 are granted with anticipatery

The resg3endent~?e¥§ce is directed te re§ease the

V» …..ee’:Et§eeer Faies.2; 3;, 5 ie § er’: bait in the even: ef their

aw

arrest in Cr.Ne.2?/2011 of Yelawaia Pcslice Statieng Mysore

an their executing a personai bond for a sum of

each with two sureties for the likesum to the _

the resp0hden’c–Po£ice on the f0HOV’§.{§{}e9»_COn§§’Efi’Q”r:§’;. »

i) Petitioner N052, 3, S 9;»sEe’:.s-{ti h

with the prosecutfeh with’esS’es n0.r”V-hhahwpef’; ”

the investigation i’r’r»e;V”r:\,z man’h.er’.~-

ii) They shalrh..4_r’hake.’_; avaifahie to
the respondeht«::o:l’ite_., ‘aé~~. and when

re_a_u:i:fe;:I fof th’e’~;3u1i’;::iQ’Sej of ih§*’estEgation.

iii) Th_.ey “§fi’a!,I attendance before

—- fhe’ .r’e:.:p.oh-de-nt?p’02-ice’once in a week tiil

f:;’:n’:;. *~of’the«~h.¢ha_f§ e-‘sheet.

__iVv) L””£fV”anyi~. of-._th*eV conditions is violated, the

anVt’ic’ip:a3_t_Q.ry baif entaifs cahcetlatieh,

— – ‘isjtirunate the concerned accordingéy.