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

Prakasha vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|30 March, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH, 2017 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MRS JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1251 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
PRAKASHA S/O LATE PEEKYANAIK AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS MASON, RESIDENT OF NAGARABHAVI CIRLCE 3RD CORSS, LEFT SIDE BENGALURU-560 072.
(BY SRI M.S.SHANKARAGULLI, ADV.,) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HOLEHONNUR POLICE STATION HOLEHONNUR BHADRAVATHI TALUK REP.BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 001 (BY SRI S.VISHWAMURTHY, HCGP) ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.101/2016 OF HOLEHONNUR BHADRAVATHI POLICE STATION, SHIVAMOGGA FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 302 AND 201 R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent- State.
The petitioner/accused No.3 along with accused Nos.1 and 2 is charge sheeted by the respondent-Police in their Crime No.101/2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. The allegation is accused No.1 being the son-in-law of the deceased had strangulated him to death with a cloth. The petitioner is said to have abetted accused No.1. There are no eye witnesses to the incident. Accused No.1 is enlarged on bail by the order of this Court in Crl.P.Nos.691/2017 dated 13.3.2017. The investigation since complete, there is no impediment to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
3. Accordingly, petition is allowed. Petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.101/2016 registered by the respondent- Police, subject to following conditions:
(i) He shall execute a self bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum. The surety shall furnish his Aadhar Card and original title deed pertaining to his immovable property for perusal of the Court;
(ii) He shall attend the Court on all hearing dates regularly and punctually;
(iii) He shall not prevail upon the prosecution witnesses;
(iv) He shall produce the documentary proof of his residential address to the Court and also to the SHO of the concerned Police Station and make himself available before the SHO in case of necessity.
Sd/- JUDGE PB
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

Prakasha vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
30 March, 2017
Judges
  • Rathnakala