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

Sri C Muniraju vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|19 August, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 3481 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
SRI.C.MUNIRAJU, S/O CHINNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC: CONDUCTOR, R/At PANJAPALLI VILLAGE AND POST PALAKODU TALUK, DHARMAPURI DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU – 636 101.
.. PETITIONER (BY SRI.C.R.RAGHAVENDRA REDDY, ADV.) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ANEKAL POLICE STATION, ANEKAL TALUK, REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT, BANGALORE – 560 001.
(BY SRI.K.P.YOGANNA, HCGP) .. RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 CR.P.C. PARYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.54/2019 OF ANEKAL POLICE STATION, BENGALURUR FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 323, 353, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner was alleged to be the conductor of bus bearing registration No.TN.29-N-2298 which was plying from Denkinikote to Anekal. The said bus was checked by the complainant, by name Chinnamari, who was working as Checking Inspector. He found that the petitioner had not issued tickets to 25 travellers in the said bus. When he questioned the same with the petitioner, he raised quarrel with him and abused him in filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences of assaulting him with the help of rowdies and also assaulted him on his stomach. On these allegations, complaint came to be lodged.
3. On careful perusal of above said allegations, what exactly transpired on that particular day has to be established during the course of the trial. The offences are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. No injury has been caused to the complainant. In the above said circumstances, in my opinion, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. Hence, the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.54/2019 of Anekal Police Station, for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 353, 504, 506 r/w 34 of IPC, on 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 he 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 they shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.
iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction without prior permission of the Court, 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 ln.
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

Sri C Muniraju vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
19 August, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra