Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Mohammed Mansoor And Others vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|28 June, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF JUNE 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4721/2017 BETWEEN:
1. MOHAMMED MANSOOR S/O ABDUL KHADAR AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT KAIKAMBA VILLAGE MANGALORE TALUK D.K.DISTRICT – 575 231.
2. MOHAMMED SHAREEF S/O ABDUL KHADAR AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT BENGARE, KASABA NEAR JUMA MASJID BUNDAR POST MANGALORE TALUK D.K.DISTRICT – 575 232. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI B.LETHIF, ADV.) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHAVINARASANTHE POLICE STATION KODAGU DISTRICT REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE – 560 001. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI CHETAN DESAI, HCGP.) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN CR.NO.85/2017 OF SHANIVARASANTHE P.S., MADIKERI FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 353, 307, 427 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.3(2)(A) OF PREVENTION OF DAMAGE TO PUBLIC PROPERTY ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
2. The petitioners are in custody in respect of Cr.No.85/17 registered by the respondent-police for the offences punishable under sections 353, 307, 427 r/w section 34 of IPC and section 3(2)(a) of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act 1984.
3. The allegation is, the petitioners despite signaled by the complainant/Head Constable of the respondent-police to stop the vehicles, avoided the barricade, attempted to run over their vehicles on the complainant and his staff, made them jump into the drainage to save themselves, and suffer injuries. The petitioners drove their vehicles over the barricade and damaged the same.
4. The nature of the allegation does not warrant their continued judicial custody for the purpose of further investigation. In the circumstance, there is no impediment to allow the petition.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Petitioners are enlarged on bail in Crime No.85/2017 of respondent-police, subject to the following conditions:
(i) They shall execute a self bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(ii) They shall mark their attendance before the concerned police station on every Friday till filing of the final report.
(iii) They shall attend the Court on all hearing dates regularly and punctually.
(iv) They shall not terrorize the prosecution witnesses.
Dvr:
Sd/- JUDGE
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

Mohammed Mansoor And Others vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
28 June, 2017
Judges
  • Rathnakala