IN THE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 23% DAY or' FEBRUARY)' _ BEFORE ~ THE HON'BLE MR..}UST£CE;:A. S..iénPAucH:HA~PURE;_'V ; a 1:' Cr1.P. No.8417o[2.qo2 Between: it it Yogesh Swamy, 4_ . » S /o Gangadharayya Hirem.athT; Q} Aged about 35' years, vi ' Occ: Business,' _ - R/0. H.No.38, ''i;Tso0r,'--. % A ' Savkarkeri,"Shika.rip1ir,« " V' v . Dist: Shirnogag " ' .. PETITIONER (By sri.'-s'. :2. Vjnéjgcie »i5g'A§so¢iates, Adv.) AN13:"'». " V i it 7E'Zi--:;e State of Karilataka, '- a By Honattar 13.8. V " R/b.y.'«S}?P;~-- High Court of V _i.Kar;i'a.¢ta*l<aV,.Circuit Bench, 2 .Di11aI'Wuad__. .. RESPONDENT E:--'$:r.i.V'iVr1aya1<: S. Kulkarni, HCGP) This Cr1.P is filed under section 438 of Cr.P.C. *praying to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Honavar P.S. Crime No.209/2008 in S.C.No.6'7/2009, and etc. This Cri.P coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:-- ORDER
The petitioner has filed this petitiori’.iVseeeir;iiag
anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest
punishable under sections 394,:’3i3¥2′;32:’;, icf
IPC. , . ~. ._
2. The facts that=ar_e relevant f0I’5th£f: purposeiof
this petition are as under:
It is on 31.72008 thatvth.e»comp1ainar1t Joaquirn
Misquitta, the owneriiidriveraVofiflh/Iiaruti Ornni van
beazring _iireigistration:”E\[o.GA-01/E2765 was near the
Muniicipialityi efiiee’ea’t”-a/iar=’goa and on 30.7.2008 at about
3.515 uwheii was near the bus–star1d, about 5
i’unkh’iowi’i..¢personisi came and requested to provide his
ewarerettea The hire charge was agreed at Rs.1,400/–
‘ …a_ad petr’o.1’worth RS700/~ was filled in. While they were
proceeding they stopped the vehicle near Mayur Hotel and
it e. _ai’ter consuming liquor there when they were proceeding
on the highway, it is aileged that the said accused gave
54,,
6. The point that arises for my consideration is,
‘whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail
sought for?’
7. The perusal of the complaint do V’
name of the petitioner. it is von’ly—-.or1 V
voluntary statement of Accused i’:o.2.A_Athat ti2e:”narne’r
petitioner was revealed. V the _vi1n-velstigatiojn is’-‘
complete and the charge “ha’s«…l)een ‘flied. ffhough it
is stated by the the petitioner is
absconding since from ‘tl1eVl«daie:”of the .ir1’eident, there is no
mate1’ial.lpl’aced:¢ion record iwith..regard to the search made
by ‘Ethel “trace out the petitioner.
P’urthermore, ‘relexfant to note no identification parade
been hel’d.dfurir:g the investigation. The question as
Wrp v4Z1;’l€3tl’i.t;’fiIi””tlf_1€ grounds raised relates to the statement of
H 2 lithe aCtiu–sed.l’no.2, is a matter for consideration during the
ti”ial;’—-VA Prima facie taking into consideration the material
V * .-placed on record, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case
i”w.l'”wherein anticipatory bail could be granted to the
petitioner for a limited period. Hence, I answer the___point
in the affirmative and pass the following:
ORDER
The petition is allowed. petitionezf’v.i»s”‘granteti”~ it
anticipatory bail for a period of fi.fteen- ;_i it
In the event of his arres’t._pby the}–Eonln.a\}ar”3Polilce in”
Crime No.209/2008,»..regis&tereali_:”~fo1:_.oftenCevs. plinishable
under sections 394,l”‘3zi_g., ei§1a.V<i82 of IPC, the
petitioner sh._a:l1.__pbe his executing
personal. a /– with two solvent
sureties of the arresting
authori–:ty with 'further.fo'l–1_owing conditions:
i. __ The "shall appear before the I-Ionnavar
E V:Po__lice Slltationwithin one week from today.
petitioner shall not cause any threat,
_v'c0ié~riCe or tamper with any of the prosecution
V 'Witnesses.
t4
iii.
st.5f}1iv/
The petitioner is at iiberty to submit appiicatipn for
regular bail before the court concerned witl{1in ‘t1f1e
per£0d of anticipatory bail granted.
The petition is accordingly’diSpCs¢d.&of,;« :~ ‘.
>, . / 1 V x A’