High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri.Rajappa @ Yekkanahalli … vs State Of Karnataka on 23 November, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri.Rajappa @ Yekkanahalli … vs State Of Karnataka on 23 November, 2009
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT 6
BANGALORE >*

DATED THIS THE 23*" DAY OF NOVII;IvII;E-EIIAEIIIIS " 

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HDLDVAD1§G'.RANIESII_5

CRIMINAL P§TIT'3()N..N(i.'5.293 Oi"V2i)§'}9.  f;
BETWEEN: % %
SRLRAJAPPA @ YEKKANAIIASDLIEAJAEPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARSC-.O A   ._
S/O.EAsAI>PA._   A   I 
OCC COOLIE, R,{€)._NELIAi-i'ON_NE VILLAGE
HONNALI'i'TALU"i<'3?, I _  
DAVANAGER'-E5IQISTR'£C"T «A _:   PETITIONER
(By 3:;  A ?

AND: A

sT»A-3TE__LOF KAR'NAT./:'.KA

 BY"HO'N1N_A;L.._I POLICE STATION  RESPONDENT

I§AMAK_RIsHNA, HCGP)

‘TTFI.IS””V’CRL.P IS FILED U/S/139 CR.P.C BY THE

ADVOCATE FOR THE PETi.TIONER PRAYING THAT
T;+IiI_s H”ON’ELE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO RELEASE

” THE: PETITIONER ON’ BAIL IN CRIME N0.1.89/2009 OF
LIONNAL1 POLICE STATION, PENDING IN S.C.NO.7?,/09
.,..”(jN THE FILE OF’ II ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE AT

DAVANAGERE, FOR THE OFFENCE, P/U/s.302 & 201 OF
nvc.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMIN{3:rQ:3x;’ji-._1é*¢i{‘-O
ORDERS THIS DAY. THE COURT_..__M~AxD-E’~

FOLLOWING-

0RDERhi

Petitioner has stiuglit ffbri’ regulér bail in
connection with Crime NO5_I’89/’09 H’0Vr.1’I’i’ti_i£ Ptilice.

2. A5; .pe1}..;31;Oseca:tiOiii;ifon the alleged Voiuritary statement
of the “z1cct1sed.V’pOfi’i»ce “seijzzed chopper from the spot. The

t11I€g£l[i()nxi5_ that.’\NhC:l’:’,._’fi1€ petitioner did not succeed in

cO.frn’ii1itti’ng,M_ rape “(_)n…t.he’ deceased On the ground that she would

i’6\:i€8,1 ‘t’he’tf;ict;tt>. the public, he committed her murder.

” 3_.__i Heard.

W,

4. it is the subniission of the learned Counsel for the

peti.t.ione1′ that petitioner is innocent of the alleged _4oVffenie.es.

The case is entirely basaed on ci1’cumstant._i–;ii_

Accorciingly, sought for grant of bail. ».

5. Learned G0veinme11t”–.i’i€z1dei.’ thatii’

C.Ws.l7 and 18 have .iéis.t’_see:n’iihee-iiacéifiséd n6Ei1iIi”tii€ piacfi 0′?
incident.

6. Haifing :’i§€gai”Ci «Id-i_i1eiif2ictsi’gan(i circumstances of the
case, it is not zivv-‘case for’ ‘g;ii”anit i)f’h’-hail.’ However, it is for the
petitioner to presSi’fg,~.,ea1′!y Accordingly, petition is

_____

Sd/-«i
JUDGE

J.