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

The State Of Karnataka Through Belthangady Police Station

High Court Of Karnataka|26 October, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7392/2017 BETWEEN:
1. Asif, S/o Thammonu @ Ibrahim, Aged about 22 years, R/at Peradithayana Katte Tenka Karandoor villagte Belthangady Taluk Dakshina Kannada – 574 214 2. Riyaz, S/o Ahammed Aged about 31 years, R/o Baraya, Kuvettu Village, Belthangady Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District – 574 214 3. Abdul Ravoof S/o Abbas Aged about 21 years, R/o Baraya House, Kuvettu Village, Belthangady Taluk D K District - 574214 ... Petitioners (By Sri. Rahul Rai, Advocate For Sri. Aruna Shyam, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka Through Belthangady Police Station, D.K Rep. by its State Public Prosecutor High Court Building High Court of Karnataka Bengaluru – 560 001 . ...Respondent (By Sri.K.Nageshwarappa, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.140/2017 of Belthangadi P.S., D.K., District for the offence punishable under Section 326, 307 read with Section 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking their release on bail for the offences punishable under Sections 326, 307 read with Section 34 of IPC, registered in respondent – police station Crime No.140/2017.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as per the complaint averments is that, one Irfan is the complainant wherein it is stated that on 25.06.2017 in the evening hours complainant gone near Guruvayanakere Masjid along with one Nisar Ahammed as per call made by some one to discuss about supply of sand and that the person who met them near Guruvayanakere Masjid took them to a scheduled place in the guise of showing place for dumping sand, wherein the said person was joined by other two persons and after the discussion when they were about to return, all the three persons attacked them with talwars and caused injuries to him as well as Nisar Ahammed. The complainant and Nisar Ahammed were taken to hospital for treatment. On the basis of complaint, case came to be registered firstly against three unknown persons and during the course of investigation petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 3.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused No.1 to 3 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials on record.
5. It is contended by the petitioners / accused Nos.1 to 3 that there is a false implication on the petitioners in the case. They have not involved and not committed the alleged offence.
6. The learned HCGP made submission that looking into the injury certificate, there are grievous and simple injury. But both sides made the submission that now the investigation is complete and now charge sheet is filed. Though the alleged offence is under Section 307 of IPC but at this stage as the injured is discharged from the hospital, the condition of the injured is safe and out of danger. Investigation is complete and charge sheet is filed. The alleged offence under Section 307 of IPC is also not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment of life. From the date of arrest, the petitioners are in custody. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioners can be admitted to regular bail.
8. Accordingly, petition is allowed.
Petitioners/accused No.1 to 3 are ordered to be released on bail for the offence punishable under Sections 326, 307 read with Section 34 of IPC, registered in respondent – police station Crime No.140/2017 subject to the following conditions:
i. Each of the Petitioner has to execute a personal bond for Rs.50,000/- and has to furnish one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
ii. Petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioners have to appear before the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/- JUDGE UN
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

The State Of Karnataka Through Belthangady Police Station

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
26 October, 2017
Judges
  • Budihal R B Criminal