High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Ramesh @ Pavan Kumar vs State By Indiranagar Ps on 21 April, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri Ramesh @ Pavan Kumar vs State By Indiranagar Ps on 21 April, 2009
Author: Dr.K.Bhakthavatsala
Cr|.P No. E338!2009

IN THE} HIGH COURT 0;? KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 218'? DAY or APRIL 2009
BEFORE
TKE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K. Bz§A:y--.the F-rAoseci1tor'," it
High' vCOL1:ft.Qf Karna.tal:a,
Banga'io__re,&i_ ' " ~ B'  Respondent

 (B3:~Sri A   HCGP, for respondent)

    iciirirninai Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of
   _C.rim_i_naI" Procedure, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime
 iV'o".5.4:/"20(g39 of Endiranagar Police Station, Bangalore City, which is



CrE.P No.l338f2009

registered for the offence under Sections 468, 471, 120-8 and 420 of
I P C.

This Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Cotivrtntriiade

the following:

ORDER

The petitioner/accused No.13 in

Indiranagar Police Station is before this..:Court 439 of it

the Code of Criminal Procedure”,…seeking the ‘offence under

Sections 468, 471, 120-8 and 426 bf’ th’e.,Iii’1dia_nie’ii?erialCode.

2. Learned Coiinis«eli:»foii_j_ the-..__ipetition,er__submits that accused
Nos.14 and 15,lv}1aveT’been’1iienlaafiediorrbaili as per the order dated
3.4.2009 made in Crl.P 1:18 and therefore on the ground of

parity, the pre sentiipetitionier is._alsojentitled for bail.

_ V3. Lear;§1edt{3–overriment Pleader submits that if the petitioner is

enlarged’ on»iibaili,.ihe¢ would tamper with the prosecution witnesses

and he \i}’oul’dVal’so”‘1’1,ee :if’rvo’ir1 the course of justice.

Crl.P N0. 1 3383009

4. Keeping in View that the present petitioner was arrested

solely on the basis of statement of accused No.7, there is no-“good

ground to deny bail to the petitioner.

Court/trial Court is directed to release the ipetiit-loner o1’1__iba,il,..

5. In the result, the Petition is allowed. The’i’i:.r;om,rn:ittav1

to fulfillment of following conditions: i

.. case; I

that the petitioner isiliall personal bond for a
sum of Rs.v2£l,i0QO like sum to the
ii’ vi V
that attendance in the
coincernedi second Saturday of every

monthjgetween and 10 am., until the disposal of

“i _thatliih-eipetitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution
eyidence or documents; and

thefipetitioner shall attend the Court regularly.

Sd/-l__
Judge