IN THE HIGH coum' or KARNATAKA AT BANG-i%!Lb'Ié\#?i._:": .
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF C')Q'VI'>()BI3*3I_.=?;' '2ér)g[ *
BEFORE » % 4' .
THE HQNBLE MR. Jusrrcgasgaoré' 3§%%r1tNc;g;%jcg:§:2fVVV N
CRIMINAL PETITION Nc;§%%~::IV;?S;2!_VOF'V'2Q"
BETWEEN: -
SHOUKATH @ GULLU '- _ .
3/0 ABDUL KARIM .
AGE!) 30 YEARS ' E. .
occ: DRIVER H _ _
R'/O NEAR SHARA BEHARY
132* CROSS, AVALAHAL1,_I,g '
KANAKAPURA Mmm R{_)A{§'ii::, "
BANGALQRE 560 _
% I, . _ PETITIONER
'{BY SRI MANJU 'B3,, ADVOCATE)
AND: 'V ' " "
S'1'}§i'E--QF"f{A:aRi9ATAKA """ "
13? 'SUBRAMANYA.P£IRMJ POLICE
_ _ - RESPONDENT
_ gm SR1 HONNAPPA, HCGP)
THIS C35,? IS man U/8.439 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR
" PETITIONEVRPRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAiL IN
':S.'C'.R0~:75i?I'$7 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE FTC-V, BANGALORE
(CR;-NC' OF SUBRAMANYAPURA RS.) WHICH IS REGD. FOR' THE
P/U/3.302 R/W 34 OF WC.
T TH'iS CR'L.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS BAY, THE COURT
f j 'MAD"E THE FOLLOWING;
9.£_D_E_E
The respondent registered Cr.i.me:=._v :"fofV:"tthé::,t_:
oflenees punishable under Section 30?. V
2. The ease of the pmsecueon i'e"t11.at'o;o"i'2.9§.20O7
there was a dispute between * -the deceased
Nagaraju over the ' The
deceased had slapped the No. 1. After one
month, i.e. on and 3 boaniled the
autoriokshaw d3z_ive1:- pretending that they are the
eommuters of Near Subramanyapura, they
dragged the 'deeeaoed ceught hold of the deceased so as to
130.1 to stab him. The accused No.1 stabbed
.
V –V 3. ..l\ri”§a;13;iit:.t1at11, the learned counsel for the petitioner
that tlie pefitioner has been in judicial custody for two
He tsilbmits that because» of deoeased’s involvement in some
‘ , V ttmxsactions his life is taken away by somebody. The
has nothing to do with it. He submits that accused No.2
QEH
and 3 are already enlarged on bail and that ~
gonad of parity also the petiiiozaer is enti*tJ1c§;d>_’to the” fif ‘A V’
4. Sri Homaappa, the lcamcd
Pleader brings to my notice that the ~vi;:ié*:itio11.V.er-.1.§.;<a1cif*:ice§i1.v:4'C:Vix:£:ina1 k'
Petition No.3548I 2003. whicms diszni:%$c<i'V"by mm, by its
o1dcr,dt.21.08.2008. He subfijiig djscxoscd in this
petition.
5. As fllfi on 13.06.2007, the
petitioner majv§f’Ii’éivc: for 15?: years and not
two years as _:;;$e:1%”iiionefs learned advocate. The
enlaxvgcmcnfi 9f 3 on bail does not entitle: the
pe tifi91_1er avert acts are attributed to the
= .I_t” of the pmsccution that while accused
catching hold of the deceased, it is the
_T §o_g:.1.jitiQ;1er ;:§:hc$”‘V;:r.th.é1;fibcd the deceased. The stabbing incident
itcfn.’3.aveNhappcncd one month after the quarrel, which took
the petitioner and the deceased. The cixcumstanees
V ” that a oenspiracy may have been hatched to murder the
‘ ‘ % Nagaxaju.
35%.
6. I do see any merit in this petition. I dismisslif. H
appreciating that the petitioner has ” V
nearly 1 fié years, I direct that the trial be
bvr