Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Mohammad Imptiyaz vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|27 August, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.5113/2019 BETWEEN:
Mohammad Imptiyaz Aged 29 years S/o Moideenabba R/o 1-125 Kaje, Mallur Post Mallur, Mangaluru D.K. District – 575 029. …Petitioner (By Sri Jeevan K, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka By the Police of Mangaluru Rural Police Station Represented by the State Public Prosecutor High Court buildings High Court of Karnataka Bengaluru – 560 001. …Respondent (By Sri K P Yoganna, HCGP) This Criminal Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.14/2019 of Mangalore rural P.S., Mangaluru for the offence P/U/S 379 of IPC, Sections 4, 8, 9, 11 of Karnataka Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Cattle Prevention Act and Section 11(1)(A), 11(A), 11(1)(D), 11(1)(E) of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Petitioner is arraigned as accused No.2 in crime No.14/2019 of respondent police pending on the file of III J.M.F.C. Court, Mangaluru, for the offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC.
2. Brief allegations are that on 17.2.2019, accused Nos.1 and 2 have committed the theft of a cow belonging to the complainant by name Mohammed Putha of Ulaibettu village, Mangaluru city. Accused No.1 was arrested and during the course of investigation, he divulged the name of the petitioner and he also told that the petitioner in fact has cut and sold the said cow.
3. Looking to the above said facts and circumstances, except the voluntary statement of accused No.1, there is nothing on record to implicate the petitioner herein in any manner. The offence under Section 379 of IPC is not seriously punishable with severe punishment. Under the above circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
4. As such, the petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.14/2019 of Mangalore Rural Police Station, subject to the following conditions:-
i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within Ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer.
ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation, and he shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.
iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Investigating Officer without prior permission, till the charge sheet is filed or for a period of three months whichever is earlier.
v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a week i.e., on every Sunday between 10.00 am and 5.00 pm., before the Investigating Officer for a period of two months or till the charge sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.
Sd/- JUDGE Cs
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Mohammad Imptiyaz vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
27 August, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra