Karnataka High Court
Rafiq Ahmed vs State By Vijaya Nagar P.S. on 17 January, 2011
Author: V.Jagannathan
Bench: V.Jagannathan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF EARNAT. A aT BANG ALORD a be [HE HON'BLE MR . JUSTICE VJAGANNATHAN fy IMINAL REVISION PETG on N C 3987 £2009 CRIMINAL EEVIS SION Pe TION. NO.1,064/ 2009 CRIMINAL R a sg iN BETS AOSS? 72009 a BETWEEN: Shanthi N aur, viygore (UT iP No.7 708) ~ B Mohiddeon Koya g & (Gfe Abdul Kutti hge a about oo years, Ja ldevelli th fal wurath House ee . Cancut. Keraia ~ G72 014 aut Acts s C2 fale bee Ae also et No.l, Bmerth Colorry Bharatheeyara Nager A.E.EKoyal Street New Vashermen Fet --_ 7 va Chennai (UTP Ne. 7727} "PETITIONERS _ (RY SRT YOUNOUS ALI KHAN, ADVOC ATE} AND State By Vieya fT Nagar PS. Mysore. Represents aad ny a ; oe The State Pubse Prosecuter: High Court of Kix snatska High Court Bu tics Bangalore. Co oe . RESPONDENT (BY SRLP "BAL RUNAKAR, # CGP) ma THIS mat) LEP. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 Re aot OR, PC BY THE ADVOC 'TE FOR THE "PETITIONERS. PRAVING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE. PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE CHARG aES DATED 05.08.2008 FRAMED IN Se NO.B1/ 2207 © . YRUIAY BAGAR POLICE, MYSORE, PENDING ON THE : FILE ¢ Or THE WEADDL. DISTRICT ANT? SESSIONS ie SGE , MYSORE. e Raa é No.5, Hebbal Colony, Dasavergud Road, Metge a Ly Peet, Mysore (UTP No.7 683) a o © 7 sgt on brevet 2. Gor Sia Ayyaih Ages about 29 years No.76, Sweeper Colony Koopalur J. Mager, 7 Moysere (UTP No. 7684). - S. lets) Sfe Moharmie er (BY SREVCUNOUS. AL KHAN, AD ADVOCATE) 'By Vieya Nager P me oS Mysore. f ¥ SRLP.KARUNAKAR, HCGR THIS CRLRE.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION sor R/W 401 CR.PC BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE CHP y yp Pey Sar eS Cae 9G AS ree rs. Aw Te eTce Eee VEFIEhY Te pe eres EUS 228 £5288 2S BASS Bob 2 Lee & se) AE FE: UAE EL ES fb te, a? er 2 peers hey ee DoE JL 7 Fa TESE CRIMINAL REVISE £ Tend a 2. queetiorss 'identical be: --
Pharr A Vhees Ce
-
or ge Sek BPs aah B48 See om ners Hille § be ea Bee _ Accuse:
z ESTES a Be e cer game sec a
2.3 jot pat 85, gig a intioes ee eee Tore Bd ct & ERE He Soe e :
"at "eh, del Pari Ere z Sake F are if Was alowed ard the onearge levelled tenable ari said charge was set asic halt went of sullicient material, thé charge i reapect of the offence unler section a32 and C383 3 £ IPC were aleo set aaide and as far as other reterenes wider section 465 og cote of the period eh GOUT, Curecta rélengs of ee re ' regain order of this court. remains urder Section 465, 471, 419 as well an 417 of IPC arid all these offences are not punishable far more eT EE i yerrs and two months ard even © petits oners s were t to be convicted in respect of the other offences yet ---- "of - the custody already undergone" by. then, that 'result well be seme. On the other | ned the } pet titio Overs are. in custody for more period thei is whet 'ibey would have urdergone if co byibtion: order passed agdinat them in reapect of the aforemen mation ie Of ene 28.
4. The thew. § Submission. ef the petitioners counsel, is mo 'con vetrmcticeed by. the learned High Court Government Ples vader. both: n respect of the order against cietodsr iu nderg: ene by each one of the petitioners, it is . . % oo stated to fe, more t then four years ard two months o 'othe above circumstances no useful purpoee will be served in waking the petitioners to fies the tal and 'an the other hand there will be more delay, the
-- petitioners wil heve to be in custedy for ati] longer ; Sha . ;
period it cannot be sountenanced, when the ae 3 ' ea :
- Lae ee Te eerases fone bbe vy PRs wom Foy oo 1S" L TLS CSTee Pl PoP LP bid Jake ESESEGEY wel Por the above aul reasars. both the petit ores are ce liberty forthwith if not required "in een cand."
intimation toa be Bert to the jan eushori forthwith. Copy of the order te ine fornietied af ert With to the High Caurt Government Pleatier for compliance. Sd/-
J udge x ole ve ioe we * weal ae ry sted Hag eos ene ' eyes ben ved ea ae _ eth de hace "ed a ede! oa Hanae piss ne * Pa rE,
- Sd/~ Judge oss Bat pe