'T77 1 _ IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 15% DAY OF NOVEMBER.V2§-(;):'i.Q BEFORE " %' THE HONBLE MR.JUS'I'ICE CRIMENAL PETITIONZNO,_-53145/fiO.'1'()4i i Z,,% 7 BETWEEN: V V . I . Smt. Jayamaia W/o. H.M.Ramachand--r§1 D/0. G.Orr1ayya V Aged 52 years _e ' _ No.496, 6W Main, Do11ars_C=:)io:1y " RMVIIStage,_. _ , _ Bangalore--5EiO 'V ....Petitioner (By Sn' cigsigiiiiifiai-.a,i:gkikifiicaite) AND}; 1. of Police _-- ., Infantry Read '- » ' _B"angai0"re» . H _____ H . A f2; «Statioh House Officer vvS;:r§1ja}:7'-I\}*'agar Police Station Barigaiore. 3. ii .. Superintendent of Police "Grime Branch, CID AA Kottayam District ' Kerala State. Respondents
” ” “(By Sri Vijaykumar Majage, HCGP for R1 & R2)
E2-
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438
Cr.P.C., PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER ON
BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HER ARREST IN CRIME
No.l44/CR/KIM/07/CBCID, KOTTAYAM, KERALA
STATE, FOR AN OFFENCE PUNISHABLEW UNDER
SECTION 295[A) R/W IZOB IPC. ~
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING.:’:I~., A I ~. ‘
Petitioner is appIeh4endirIgh”‘ arrest
NO.144/CR/KTM/2007 re§iSter_ed it Hi offence
punishable under Section 295A l~–P_CT..”~t_)y CBCID, EOW-
II, Kottayam, pKerala_..State;V._ ‘has sought for
to henlable her to approach the
jurisdictional
Wl1.en .rr_1_atter is taken up for hearing. learned
Pleader has made available the letter
the Superintendent of Police, CB CID,
EO’\?\rT–vi’I;;_ Kottayam District, Kerala State to the State
A AP:n’blic Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore
it ivherein it is clearly Stated that Superintendent of
Police, CB CID, EOW–II has no intention to arrest the
petitioner and there is no objection for granting interim
bail to the petitioner in the instant petition.
fly. F.
L. 9” “”'({I\ ”
c 3 _
2. Sri. KN. Rajeev, Deputy Superintendent of
Police, CB CID, EOW–II is present before Court to
confirm the contents of this letter. T he letter
on record. it it d
3. In View of this letter, apprehensi.on_:’
that she is going to be arrestedflby
Case No. 144/CR/KTM/200? is dvbadselessr’ f .
learned counsel for theV’Vt4l”:p_etitioner that
petitioner is still it it
l V Superintendent of Police,
CBCII5, that petitioner will not be
arrested. 4″I’11..:yiexy of’-aforestated letter and in View of the
psu’brnis’sior.1, madewby Sri. Rajeev, petitioner cannot have
her arrest at the hands of the 3″!
respond’cnt. Petition has become infructuous.
.Accord–ingly, it is disposed of, however with an
“observation that the 3″ respondent and Sri Rajeev,
” “”§eputy Superintendent of Police shall stand by the
letter dated 14.11.2010 and what has been s ated by
‘\L(“i” /«.53-“”‘[‘
M 4 FVVVV
Sri. Rajeev, Deputy Superintendent of Police, CB CID,
EOW~H, Kottayam, before this Court.
eeeeVAeee33/3
KS