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
11 paragraphs · 369 wordsB.V. Pinto
This petition is filed seeking bail in Crime No. 153/ 2010 of Harohalli police station, Kanakapura Taluk registered on 01.08-2010 for the offence punishable U/s. 384 of IPC.
It is the case of the complainant, Sri. Krishna that, on 31.07.2010, when he was going towards his house from Bangalore in a motor cycle, at about 10.00 p.m., he was stopped by two persons and cash of Rs.40,000/ - was snatched from his pooket and ATM card of IDBI Bank and cheque of Rs. 12,000/- and two mobile phones were also snatched from his pocket. The key of the bike was also snatched by the said person on the basis of which, the aforesaid offence came to be registered.
Heard Sri. Mahesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Vijaykumar Majage, learned HCGP for the State/Respondent
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, petitioner was arrested on 04.08.2010 and he is in custody even till this date.
The learned HCGP submits that, charge sheet has been filed. He further submits that, cash and mobile has been recovered by the police and that there are three other cases registered against the petitioner.
However, with a hope that the petitioner would reform himself and come to the mainstream of life, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7 Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his executing parsonal bond for Rs. .25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Court below and subject to following conditions:
i) The petitioner shall appear before the police station once in a week for a period of four weeks and thereafter, once in a month till disposal of the case.
ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in any other cases If it is found that, that the petitioner is indulging other cases, the State is at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail and the Court before which such an application is Sled shall be at liberty to cancel the bail without reference to this Court.
iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
