IN THE BKGH COURT' OF KARNKTAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD S
Daied this the 03rd éay of March gt}-9 : "
Before '
THE HUMBLE MR J{}"S'I'ICf5 ;;mwap;< S
Cfimizzai Petitiofi N«.«_:....'.? 1'%:2-@009 ' 'A
Betwaen; u b . '
SR§ V FEAVIKLEMAR
AGED:53 YEARS
S/OVRAJARAQ
R/AT DODR :;0v3...9D;/ 1 '*3, "
SREE BALAJE NILAYA;
M VNAGAR * . ' _
EELLARY 533133" _ ' PETITIONER
(By Sri: V ;:,.!a§<sm&1;:§ARAYAf€-A,'kmv)
'i"HE' mg; --f:}}3'».«vijé{fi§f{A§~%if553'AKA
BY PoL;c:.1§;«suB_:f.1:~;s;~§r'e:<;'r<)R CVIGILANCE}
'=.(3:ULBAR:C$A EL..E:C";i221c sappy?
coeamm'---mVL1aa' smrxom BE-LLARY
_ ~3y€:*§~.;E ABIEL EUBLIC PROSECUTQR
H233 CC*{§RTi)F' KARNATAKA
'?._';::g:::I3':fI* BENQH
'V._DH £aRWA'B'*' RESPONDENT
ANAND K :\:AvALG1MAT1–~;, SP?)
XV
K)
can? FELEE) U/S. 438 OF <:R.P.1,EAS§:3t§–._3’1%{)=-“:;”}Rgg1~e’i{f§7
AN’I’IC§?A’T{}RY ma, TC) *rHa PE’:f:f1’*i1::3NER .’:;3fi: ”
(VIGILAi’\ECE}, GULBARGA _ “‘;r§,:,E.<;TRié:;;Ty_ VVESUPPLY
COMPANY PGLICE s'1';§?:.£€iE Q?-1’ij=:a,E’_w__FiR BEARENG
Nc::,510/ 2008 mé.’3,_12.2{}Gs– 7§j;14§;;3j.L;/ 3351 1} mi) 152
or THE ELE€.§I{§€fiTY::’–AC:*1′;V.2(§?}3 §}N'”‘i””HE FILE OF THE
mm. DIs*=it*.H &}.”‘;:-;_§jS§$»”:::<):'~q4s';:-: BELLARY AM} we THE
EvENT%..m*_Ai¥iii{'33' -'._IV'<.i' 'R–E.;£§Asg THE PETITIONS?
an 31-=;.;vL, _o1¥&V'V%:::;'c:_:H.'rE%i§'Ms–Am; CONDITIONS as mzs
HGN'BflE WV €C)U'RfT"A:.jiv§}1;Y..£ BEEM m' TD IMPOSE, BY
ALLow1NC;mis V c;3%:1ie;;mi; PET§TIGN.
<Eé§s.:4V"c;g:M1NAL PETITEQN COMING om FOR
-G%:;:3VET;r.sE»<:f;§1)_;aY, THE; comm' MASE THE FOLLOWING:
QRDER
" ; '~TE'}:1;i3 pctitien is filed by the petitioner seeking
' a£;.t:icipat{):"§; bail in the (':V€':}11!Z of his armst in connection
W
with FIR bearing N0.51{7/ 2008 dated 3~12«200a .
Sections; 135(1) and 152 of the Electricity Aci,"2f'i§}.3é."'~V:: .4' 'V
2. Allcging theft {)f6}€tC”§1’iC.’i@_§ a campiamt fined u
under Section 135(1) and z5:”o£_’t:;e;VE1eV&:~;,~..a~ig§1t§é 2003.
The petitioner of $.Ba1a3'i
Engineering Works, on Cotton
Grinning activity him, thc average
meter 'based on 'aha
produgfidfi and {ham is no
theft of Ioéqfifiended that 21 false case has
been foistxéd if ‘ «
» ii;§a’rd«.:th”e__1ea1z1eé counsel for the petitioner 833.61 alsca
“1’:£~”;e ;1f:ariie4:§”_”{‘xo$?éi9nment Pleadez”, Sr’;Z.Ana:1d K Navalgimath.
In iriew of the disputed contenfioas, the petifioner
<£'c;":u;I€i;':It)€ grantezti baii subject in conditions that in the event
-snags armsst in connection with FIR beaxéng No.S1G/2008
registamd by the POHCE Subinspeatar, Guibazjéfgéé; .
axecufing a personal bond for a sum sf Rs,;2?S~,{f(}G ” =
surety far the said sum, subject t<§;bAf<3lI(3xxfi§1gf' : A'
(1) The petitioner shaLi1=:§:'a3{¢ zgizajiggbie
for invesfigazfion :;;3"ae}j'aréh::;r1 reqtiifetij
(ii) He shali not t;=§?it?r1_:TVii1\g’¢;x.,§jj;:o$ecutio11
w*i£;1é:~;$e:s; anti’ ‘ *
(iii) _”f::;r__ fxiegxsgax-A bail within one
datcfof his armst and
_f’é1§?&3$€¢ v§}§3fO4IT§i’V”§§j_lC .CC*I1C€3fI1(?d court.
Sd/-2
Iudg:5