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

Mr Sadanandha vs The State – Through The Inspector Of Police

High Court Of Karnataka|26 April, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1975 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
Mr. Sadanandha, Aged 41 years, Son of Narayana Poojary, Residing at Bhudevi, Lingapura, Mundagudda, Theethahalli-577432. ...Petitioner (By Sri.P.P.Hegde, Adv.,) AND:
The State – Through the Inspector of Police, N.R.Pura Police Station, Chikkamagaluru District-577101. (Represented by The State Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru). …Respondent (By Sri. B.J.Eshwarappa, HCGP) This criminal petition is filed under section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.5/2017 of N.R Pura P.S., Chikkamagaluru District for the offence P/U/S 4,5 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act and Sec. 66E, 67 of I.T Act and Sec. 370, 384, 504 r/w 34 of IPC and etc.
This criminal petition coming on for orders this day, the court made the following:
O R D E R Sri.B.J.Eshwarappa, the learned HCGP, takes notice for the respondent.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent.
3. The petitioner (accused No.2) along with seven others is charge-sheeted by the respondent-police in respect of the offence under Sections 4, 5 of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act and Sections 66E, 67 of the Information Technology Act and Sections 506, 384, 370(3), 120B read with 34 of IPC.
4. The case of the prosecution is, the accused persons conspired to make money by illegal means; A2 and A7 posed themselves as husband and wife; CWs1, 16 and 17 were procured to have sexual intercourse with A7 and thus videographed the scene and thereafter blackmailed CW17 and CW1. They demanded ransom of Rs.5 Lakhs from CW17, threatened him otherwise to publish the video recording and had already received Rs.2 Lakhs from him. The definite role attributed to accused No.2 in the charge sheet is he was pretending as the husband of accused No.7 and was involved in the alleged business with co-accused.
5. Perused the prosecution papers. Investigation is complete. Having regard to the nature of allegations, there is no impediment to allow the petition.
6. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No. 5/2017 of N.R.Pura Police Station, registered by the respondent-police on the following conditions : -
(i) He shall execute a self bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(iii) He shall attend the Court on all hearing dates regularly and punctually.
(iv) He shall not threaten or prevail upon the prosecution witnesses.
ckl ct-bl 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

Mr Sadanandha vs The State – Through The Inspector Of Police

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
26 April, 2017
Judges
  • Rathnakala