High Court Karnataka High Court

Prashant @ Prashi vs State By Alur Police on 20 September, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Prashant @ Prashi vs State By Alur Police on 20 September, 2010
Author: N.Ananda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 20" DAY OF SEPTEMBER 

BEFORE

THE HONBLE MR.JU7STiCE N.ANAI§1§A  O   B'

CRIMINAL PETITION No';'43I72;'<.20.vIo;'r  
BETWEEN:  A O B

1. Prashant @ Prashi
S/o Haralappa __ 
Aged about 27 YearB_s~...'_ 

2. Styani
S/o HaraIap_pa__ . _  . 
Aged about     

Both" iii'/'ark:az§{;%I:"Iv§1I:.,B.jvI11age" 
AndV_AHos}€..0te.   Taluk .. PETITIONERS

(By Sri.C."?%_,4S.:=Ingo1iOi;V.OAdI}_;} B

A "1 2 ~ by 'Al"L1I"'Po1ice
A ~..Re.p. i3yv'S.i.ater~PV1.;1b1iC Prosecutor

Barigalortigf f  . . .RESPONDENT

[By Kumar Majage, HCGP)

O C11,? is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C

. ‘p.I’a-ying to enlarge the petitioners on baii in the event of

{heir arrest in Cr.No,261/2010 of A1131’ Police Station,

-~Has:-san disiirict, registered for the offences punishable
under sections 394, 504 r/w 34 IPC.

This petitiori coming on for orders this day, the
Court made the following:

Petitioners 1 and 2 are arrayed as accused Nos}

and 2 in Crime No.26l/2010 registered for

punishable under sections 394, 504 r/w 34.–,4Ii3″C ‘

police. –

2. Heard learned Counsel

learned Government Pleaderirand 0.1′ “taken ” 0

through the investigation reeo–rds.–.

3. The first infolrfnationirvyvoiiltirreveal that first

informant-/injiJ’red_sA”iwaisf”-known to petitioners. On

21.6.2010 at aboiitff when first informant was

takiriglVfo~od inV.’lV€.an_1f_l§a.nta hotel in Alur town, petitioners

_o’thersvo’arne there, first petitioner assaulted on the

with a chopper and thereafter other

‘V aCco;sedV.pVsnatcl1ed a sum of Rs.25,000/~ from the

0’ ‘.j.pAoss.ession of first informant. The wound certificate

‘ relaiiing t.o first inforrnant shows that he had suffered

sutured wound measuring 3 X 6 ems. on his head.

Therefore, etlstoclial int,er1*ogar.io11 of first petitioner is

necessary for proper illvestigatioii of case.

Invest’1gaf.ir1g Officer, whenever calied upon to
do so.

4) This order wouid be opelative for at

two months from. today within ‘
petitioner No.2/accuse-d.:No;.2 V’
bail before the _}’urisciicti.»i3on2i;1A_’ .

ever1t., {he learned» of.__the_Tj’1;fi$Vd’ic:'[ior1a1 ”

Court shall eonsidm’ .1}§’;g,iIVV”-a.pp1io9;’Lion~’Ewithout

being influenoed’bjfo-.(§1’b}se1f§/ot’io1*1s made in this§

order.

Sd/4′
J udgé