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

Sri Sadananda Havaldar vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|05 August, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N. PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4787/2019 BETWEEN:
SRI.SADANANDA HAVALDAR, S/O LATE DASAPPA HAVALDAR, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, HOUSE NO.215(A) A.K.G.ROAD, VADERAHOBLI VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT – 576 201.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI.RAKSHITH KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, KUNDAPURA POLICE STATION, UDUPI DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. PAREEKSHITH KUMAR G.R., S/O RANGABABU, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, A.K.G. ROAD, VADERAHOBLI, NEAR SRI.DEVI NURSING HOME, KUNDAPURA TALUK - 576 201.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K.P.YOGANNA, HCGP FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 – SERVED BY GP AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.93/2019 OF KUNDAPURA P.S., UDUPI FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 3(1)(b)(c)(y) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Learned HCGP submits that notice to be served on the complainant, as directed, has been served through the police. The complainant has remained absent and there is no representation.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records.
3. The brief factual matrix of the case are that the complainant by name Pareekshith Kumar.G.R. aged about 22 years belonging to Scheduled Caste made an allegation that he is a resident of AKG Road, Vadera Hobli, Kundapura Taluk. It is alleged that knowing that he belongs to Scheduled Caste, the petitioner, his wife and daughter intentionally throwing human wastes and food wastes along with other wastes in the pathway being used by him. In the above said circumstances, for flimsy reasons it appears the dispute arose between the parties.
4. The petitioner has been arrested and he has been in judicial custody since 19.6.2019. The above said offences are not punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail particularly under Section 439 Cr.pc with stringent conditions.
5. Hence, the following:-
O R D E R The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.93/2019 of Kundapura Police Station registered against him for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(b)(c)(y) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the Court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE *alb/-.
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 Sadananda Havaldar vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
05 August, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra