High CourtsSINGLE BENCH(2017) 01 KAR CK 0265

KIRANA S/O RAJU, & ORS. vs STATE BY MUDIGERE POLICE STATION

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 17 January 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rathnakala
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
9556 of 2016 C of W CRIMINAL PETITION NO 9558 of 2016

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 416 words
1.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

2.

The petitioners in these petitions are arraigned as accused persons in Cr.No.175/16 registered by the respondent-police in respect of the offence punishable under sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 323, 324, 307, 354(B), 504, 506 r/w section 149 of IPC. Both the petitions are taken together for disposal and heard.

3.

The allegation is, on the night of 8.11.2016 the accused persons in pursuance of a previous dispute between complainant''s son and the first accused, came near the house of the complainant at 10.30 p.m., abused the inmates of the house filthily, attempted to cause murder of the complainant with lethal weapons. As per the submission at the bar, the complainant was treated in the hospital as inpatient for one day and was discharged. He has not suffered grievous injury.

4.

Specific role attributed to the petitioners of Crl.P.No.9556/16 is, they assaulted the brother of the complainant with chopper and a club while he intervened to rescue his brother. No specific overt act is attributed against the 1st petitioner(A-3) of Crl.P.No.9558/16. The 2nd petitioner of the said petition Rajesha (A-6) is said to have, along with the co-accused, dragged complainant''s wife, tore her nighty and inflicted blows on her thigh. The weapons said to have been allegedly used for the commission of the offence are said to have been seized during the spot mahazar.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in pursuance of previous enmity between the complainant and the first accused, this complaint is filed.

6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstance, there is no impediment to allow both the petitions.

Accordingly, both the petitions are allowed. Petitioners of Crl.P.No.9556/2016 are enlarged on bail on each of them executing self bond for Rs.50,000/- with one local surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court. They shall appear before the I.O. as and when called upon during further course of investigation.

Petitioners in Crl.P.No.9558/16 are granted anticipatory bail for a period of three weeks. Within the above period, they shall surrender before the concerned Court and move for regular bail. Till disposal of the bail petition, this order will be in force. If they are arrested within the above period by the respondent-I.O. in respect of the above case, they shall be released on bail on each of them executing self bond for Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the likesum.