High CourtsSingle Bench

Shabana M Ron & Others vs State Of Karnataka

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 28 April 2020 · Citation: (2020) 04 KAR CK 0065

HON’BLE JUDGES
Harish Kumar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 143, 147, 148, 149, 188, 271, 323, 324, 332, 353, 504
RESULT
Partly Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Petition No. 2180 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

23 paragraphs · 421 words

Sreenivas Harish Kumar, J

1.

Heard the petitioners counsel and the High Court Government Pleader.

2.

There are about 23 petitioners of which petitioners 1 to 6 are women. The respondent-police has registered a case against the petitioners in Crime

No.19/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 188, 271, 323, 324, 332, 353, 504 read with Section 149 IPC. The allegations

made against them are that by violating the instructions issued by the Government for effective control of pandemic Covid-19, all these petitioners

formed unlawful assembly and pelted stones and brick pieces against the police when the latter wanted to disperse the mob.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners 1 to 6 are women and the names of some of the petitioners are not found in the FIR.

Only for the purpose of offering prayers they came outside. The police have registered false complaint against all the petitioners.

4.

Learned HCGP produces wound certificates of five police personnel who were injured due to pelting of stones.

5.

In the circumstances made out in the complaint what is to be observed is that for the public good at large, the Government issued instructions for

effective control of pandemic Covid-19. If the petitioners violated those instructions and attacked the police, it has to be stated that their conduct is not

commendable. Therefore, until the entire matter is investigated by the police, I do not think that the petitioners are entitled to bail. However, taking into

consideration the fact that the petitioners 1 to 6 are women and have small children to be looked after, lenient view is taken only in respect of

petitioners 1 to 6. Hence, the following order : -

(a) Petition is partly allowed. Petition as regards petitioners 7 to 23 is dismissed.

(b) Petitioners 1 to 6 shall be released on bail by obtaining from each one of them a bond for Rs.50,000/- and a surety for the likesum to the

satisfaction of the trial court Judge.

(c) Petitioners 1 to 6 are subjected to the following conditions :-

(i) They shall not come out of their houses till the Government lifts the lock down period.

(ii) They shall not tamper with evidence or threaten the witnesses.

(iii) They shall regularly adhere to the instructions issued by the Government for control of pandemic Covid-19.

(iv) Violation of any of these conditions will result in automatic cancellation of bail.

The order may be communicated to the jail authorities for releasing petitions 1 to 6.