High Court Karnataka High Court

Tharachand vs State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Tharachand vs State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 2010
Author: N.Ananda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY 0:? OCTOBER 240x

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE"N,AN:A1\{I:.D)3§'._ V':  

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4845/2Q_1'é 33/wtt2;:9_%12t/20~i:'0.t  H

CRL.P.N0.4845/2010
BETVVEEN:

Tharachand

S/0 Chandraram  
Aged about 20 Years   .  V
R/at No.2, 8ih_..CrQs's V
K.P.Agrahara,  ._ . A _V   V
Bangalore.  >    ...PE'I'I'I'IONER

[By sr:':vi3.'2x.Bé:1:Va;§§§¢t, Adfif.'
AND: V 1' V H' V M

State of Kartf1'atvaka.,'-- A

 _ R/p rggottenpet  %_ %%%%% M A: ...RESPONDENT

I ‘2 S:V:1.\jf’i};«ay:,Aa:kt1_mar Maj age, H CGP)

{imV;}.v;1\:t’o;’}4;.~2,3;1,’«2;t/£2010

Nathuram”

‘ ..jS/0’tg}.a.in Ram
_ Aged about 24 Years
* _ “‘«–‘R2ignvas Village Chetharana Taluk
t Paii District
‘ “.Rajasthan State. …PETI’FIONER

(By Sri.Mohan_ Bhat, Adv.)

AND:

The State of Karnataka

Represented by Station House Officer

Cottonpet Police Station
Bangalore. …RESPONDEN’if

(By Sri.Vijayakumar Majage, HCGP)

These Crl.P’s are filed under Section’v’439″Cr’.-RC
praying to enlarge the petitioners o.;n.V”‘ba.il”~’in”‘.
Cr.No.309/2010 of Cottonpet Po1ice:_”St.atioI_1,’»B’anga1oi’e_’
City, registered for the offences “punishable ‘under7_

sections 399. 402 IPC.

These petitions coming_on=fo1’*,orderse the
Court made the followi:ri~g_: A t

The”‘–e4_’4petitionlersiiiin Crl.P 4912/2010 and

Crlficpl21846/2t)”i–(l:_are arrayed as Accused No.1 and

Accused*,NVo’;”8___ in Crime No.309/10 for offences

Sections 399 and 402 I.P.C.

pp _ «LI-Ieard learned Counsel for petitioner and

eyllleamed Government Pleader and I have been taken

nthlrough investigation records.

3. As per the investigation records, on 6.9.20 at

about 10.10 p.m., the Investigating Officer

credible information that 6 -« 7 persons it

deadly weapons had assembied””ir1~.the”

Veterinary Hospital on Mysore Baiigaloifeiv

they were waiting to commit
Officer visited the place’ “}oersons
including the petitioners iii petitions.
During investigation that these
petitioners 170/ 10 registered
of the undelréections 457 and 380
I.P.C. Vof.»»r:noney in the aforesaid crime

was recovered Ifrorri the “petitioners on the information

V’ “vol1i’nteeI*ed “by the Vijletitioners.

H ‘- vlTlieLj-.petitioners are in judicial custody. At the

‘Vinstancelofh’accused No.3, Rs.40,000/– was recovered

the instance of accused No.1, a sum of

‘W._*l«.Rs’;§l;l5,OOO/-. It is shown that stolen amount was

t ‘ 3 i”vVti§el9,5o,oo0/~.

5. Considering aliegations against the petitioners.

the nature of offences and punishment provided

the detention of petitioners during the trial he V’

measure of punishment.

6. In the result, I pass.t’i1e fo11ow”ifig,; ” V

Petitions are acceptehd} Peti’tioner[a’ccu.sed No.1 in
Cr1.P 4912/V izlitetitiofneri/accused No.3 in
CFLP 4845/v2%Q1o_,_ _a’1~»é.s%’ri on Baii subject to

following coiii_ditions’:'”~,f…

1} Petivtioneirsfvzxccused’No.1 and 3 shall execute
A for a Rs.50,000/~ each and offer
4″{o.r’_i.~the likesum to the satisfaction of

A j«uris_r:ii~ctiijona1 Court.

Petitioners/Accu.sed No.1 and 3 shail not

intimidate or tamper with the prosecution

witnesses. N’

Q}!

3) Petitioners/Accused N 0.1 and 3 shali regularly

attend the Court.

4} They shall mark their attend.an§f§.VV

10 ~ 2 p.m., on eVery:=__AA

Poiice Station unti1.»further’0rders.