Karnataka High Court
Sri Anil Geratagi vs State Of Karnataka on 4 January, 2016
Author: Rathnakala
Bench: Rathnakala
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8029/2015
BETWEEN:
1. SRI ANIL GERATAGI
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
S/O SIDAPPA
RESIDING AT GOLIBARMATI
NEAR BHAGMAI GUDI
SINDAGI,
BIJAPUR - 586 101.
PRESENTLY DOMICILED AT
BIJAPUR CENTRAL PRISON
BIJAPUR - 586 107.
2. SRI SRIKANTH
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
S/O BHEEMSI
RESIDING AT GOLIBARMATI
NEAR BHAGMAI GUDI
SINDAGI,
BIJAPUR - 586 101.
3. SRI BABU
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
S/O SIDAPPA
RESIDING AT GOLIBARMATI
NEAR BHAGMAI GUDI
SINDAGI,
BIJAPUR - 586 101. ...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT.MAMATHA ROY, ADV.)
-2-
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH TAVAREKERE POLICE STATION
BENGALURU - 560 030.
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. SMT.SUSHEELABAI
W/O MUTAIAH
AGED ABOUT YEARS
RESIDING AT DODDERI COLONY
TAVAREKERE HOBLI,
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
BENGALURU - 560 030. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI CHETAN DESAI, HCGP.)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO I) QUASH THE ORDER DATED
20.05.2014, ISSUING NON-BAILABLE WARRANT AGAINST THE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS.1, 2 AND 3 PENDING BEFORE THE
II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MAGADI IN C.C. NO.324/2011
AND II) CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE ORDERS OF
PROCLAMATION DATED 01.01.2015 AND 30.07.2015, AGAINST
THESE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1, 2 AND 3, PASSED BY
THE II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS, MAGADI, IN C.C.NO.324/2011.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned H.C.G.P. takes notice for respondent No.1. Notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with. -3- The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 3 in the charge sheet submitted by first respondent/Police in respect of the offence under Sections 380 and 454 of IPC.
2. By the order dated 30.7.2015, the learned Magistrate has issued N.B.W. and also Proclamation under Section 82 and Attachment Warrant under Section 83 of Cr.P.C.
3. Smt.Mamatha Roy, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that, the first accused since was involved in another criminal case was in custody from 11.8.2011. The accused were on bail at the crime stage. After filing of the charge sheet, accused were not served with summons and they were not aware of the summons issued by the Trial Court. Now the first accused is in custody in respect of C.C.No.88/2011. Though he is ordered to be enlarged on bail, because of the NBW order and the Proclamation order passed by the learned Magistrate, the Jail Authorities are refusing to release him. The petitioner Nos.2 and 3, since were not served with the court summons, could not appear before the Court. The learned Magistrate without convincing -4- himself that the accused are intentionally avoiding the process of the Court has proceeded to pass order of attachment of the property of the accused under Section 83 of Cr.P.C. This has caused miscarriage of justice. They are ready to surrender before the Court on the next date of hearing and move for regular bail.
4. Learned H.C.G.P. opposes the petition and submits that having been released on bail during crime stage, the petitioners have intentionally avoided the process of the Court after the charge sheet is filed. They have to move for recalling the order of NBW and attachment of the property before the Trial Court itself.
5. In the backdrop of the above, the order so far first accused is concerned, i.e., NBW issued against accused No.1/petitioner No.1 is hereby set aside. The Trial Court is directed to procure him under body warrant. As regards accused Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, if they surrender before the Court and move for recalling the NBW order, same shall -5- be considered and disposed of expeditiously in accordance with law.
On above terms, the petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE KNM/-