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

Sri Shankara V K vs State Of Karnataka By

High Court Of Karnataka|29 May, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MAY 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.1699/2019 Between:
Sri Shankara V.K., S/o Krishnappa, Aged about 25 years, Occupation: Agriculturist, Resident of Valagerehalli, Kasaba Hobli, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District – 571 428. … Petitioner (By Sri Basavaraju P., Advocate) And:
State of Karnataka by, Besagarahalli Police Station, Maddur Taluk & Mandya District, Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore – 560 001. … Respondent (By Sri K.P. Yoganna, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.13/2019 of Besagarahalli Police Station, Mandya for the offences p/u/s 341, 323, 327 and 149 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. and has sought for being released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the proceedings in Crime No.13/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 321, 323, 327 and 149 of IPC.
2. The petitioner states that he is an agriculturist and that has lent money to the complainant and was making attempts to recover the amount. However, the complainant in a malafide manner to harass the petitioner has filed the complaint.
3. On a perusal of the complaint and the FIR, it is seen that the offences alleged to have been committed under Sections 321, 323, 327 and 149 of IPC are minor offences and on the face of it, the complaint would not justify the custodian interrogation.
4. The petitioner has also filed a memo and produced the invitation card with respect to his wedding. However, on merits of the case as made out and taking note of the nature of offences and the punishment prescribed with respect to the said offences and as the said offences are not punishable with imprisonment or death, it is a case for granting anticipatory bail in the event of arrest of the petitioner.
5. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest with respect to the offences punishable under Sections 321, 323, 327 and 149 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:-
(a) The petitioner shall appear in person before the Investigating Officer in connection with Crime No.13/2019 within 20 days from receipt of this order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
(b) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the Investigating Officer and shall not indulge in any criminal activities henceforth.
(c) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness or hamper directly or indirectly the investigation.
(d) The petitioner shall physically present himself and mark his attendance before the concerned SHO once in every fortnight till the filing of the charge sheet.
(e) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner, howsoever minor, shall result in automatic cancellation of bail.
Sd/- JUDGE VGR
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 Shankara V K vs State Of Karnataka By

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
29 May, 2019
Judges
  • S Sunil Dutt Yadav