High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Ramesh vs Dhanaraj on 22 July, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri Ramesh vs Dhanaraj on 22 July, 2008
Author: N.Ananda
IN THE 3:014 COURT 0? KARNATAKA  

CERCUFF BENCH AT GULBARGA  'V  
DATED THIS THE 22% DAY 01:' Ju;,v%,%;2;m%;% x  T' 

BEFORE m _' AA%» 'x

THE I-iON'BLE :v;R>.J.qUs*1;:<:1§:' AN$Nfi}§" * " 

(3rl.F? No.'9z3:é~; 2007*   
Betwaen:   

Sri 'Ramesh, --. . _ --_  1
S/.VishWanathrao fieveatm,    
Age 35 years, Oec:Zi11aAP'a11¢i1aya1i1 ' "
Member, r/o,Am:_a'c1(B}I, _.  

District Bigéai-V?   .  .. Petitioner

{By sgmumd ;e§{s%. [aaz§s2;¢1;y,% Adv.)
And:  %% V' V 

      
 ' Lfolvfadhappa Bltxasziaxzie,

  ggezz ygars, Gc<3:LaboI1r.

'Q. ' 

 Silqlfiiaimchandra Rathod,
' . Age 3"?' yaars, Occ;Lab@ur.

é -- "   " 3; ..  vfieaiakanthmo,

S/ efihivabassappa Halbarga,
Age '§"S years, Occ:Agicu}tures.

'"  Pommu @ Paxamcshwar,

S/ofleelakanthrao Haibarga,
Age 35 years, €}cC:Ag:ri<:u1tum 8:.
Business.

 



Q!

Sangram,
S] ofieeiakanthracx Halbarga,

Age 48 years, {)cc::Gevt. E§mp3,ca:,e*::€:4A 

6. Mecnakshi,
W/asangram HaIBarga_, _
Age 35 years, Occ::Advocata..&. .
Z P Member, New 1*] a$Jyc5L::iV{3r)Eony;" ._ '
Bidar. .   

A3} r/o.Mudho1--B,Tq:Afi_-fid,   g "

Dist:Bidar.   "

7'. The state' V _ 'V §
througla At§ra1;i--B' Ps:31ic:-: Statian, V ' 
Dist-Sidéx,     

(By Sri Gaua:an;;%;3ev-5"m15;i;;:.%.s;dv. . fm§ R1-
Sri Shamnaipasappa' KvBabSI}.€_fi'35z_ HCGP)

This crixnixiezl ' peti1:io3:x-.  "tinder Section 439(2)
madwith Section 48'2'~--.§3f' Cr.PC, pi*ay§ng to sci aside the order
datsd 14.2.2913?' pasmd. by i.'t1e*Principa1 Sessions Jufige at
Eider'  c:r1.,_M.i.sc;, 1:59.34, 35.,_._3_§_-:15 3? ,1 200?.

 'pc5%.ii:ion coming on for admission this

I _ day, thé'-Cc;<m1; Tmadfz  {Q-licwing:

GREEK

" " .Ti:'1is  is filtd for canceliafion of bail ganteé ta

V'"*  -.:§§}12;s:*éd ais::z_§§i1.Misc.No.34, 35, 36 and 37/2902'. The State

V'  Qitlallenged the same. The learned Sessisns Juéga

   bail on wnsfleraficna of matsefiai on reconti.

g\_).

 

.. Respondents

‘§’her€:f<3I'e the cemplainant has no locus stancii
canceflation of bail ' ' VT A'

2. The leamecl counsel for pefitjpner .’
accused have violated the cor2¢:1itf:igf;2:1s:_-
that is so, petitioner is at libagy ‘£(}’f}’__%I”S1}€ t1V1e A. L,
availahlctohim by law. H V V 2

Accordingly,

%%%% gd/.4

Bkm.