Karnataka High Court
Ataaulla S/O Abdul Rajak Haveri vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 September, 2017
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101862 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
1. ATAAULLA S/O ABDUL RAJAK HAVERI
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KAGINELE, TQ: BYADGI,
DIST: HAVERI.
2. YUSUFSAB S/O BASEERSAB BADAGI
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KAGINELE, TQ: BYADGI,
DIST: HAVERI.
3. DADAPEER S/O GANISAB RANEBENNUR
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: NITTUR, TQ: HIREKERUR,
DIST: HAVERI.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.R. H. ANGADI, ADVOCATE)
A N D:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
(KAGINELE POLICE STATION)
R/BY ITS S.P.P. DHARWAD,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. ANAND K. NAVALAGIMATH, HCGP)
:2:
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438
OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE SEEKING TO ALLOW THE
PETITION AND TO ISSUE A DIRECTION TO THE KAGINELE
POLICE STAION AUTHORITIES TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS
ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CONNECTION
WITH THEIR P.S. CRIME NO. 80 OF 2016 FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 324, 326, 355, 504, 506 READ
WITH SECTION 34 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE PENDING IN
C.C.NO.364 OF 2016 ON THE FILE OF PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC BYADAGI.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused No.1 to 3 under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code seeking anticipatory bail, to direct the respondent Police to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 324, 355, 447, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and after completing investigation charge sheet was also filed for the alleged offences under Section 326 of the IPC, registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.80/2016.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case, one Abdulraseed filed the complaint alleging that he is the :3: owner of the land to an extent of 1 acre 18 guntas land bearing Survey No.18/1A. There is some dispute in respect of selling the said property with his brother and they were insisting him to get the papers signed by him. The further averments that on 16.06.2016 at about 05.10 p.m. in the evening, when he and Rehamansab, were in the fields watching the crops, at that time 3 persons i.e. accused No.1 to 3 trespassed the land, started abusing the complainant in filthy language, insisting him to sign the papers brought by them. When he refused to affix his signature on the papers, accused No.1 assaulted him with stick on his chest and hands. Accused No.2 Dadaphreer assaulted him with the agricultural implements on the left leg. Accused No.3 Yusuf assaulted him with stone on his back portion. The complainant sustained injuries and he was taken to the hospital for the treatment. On the basis of the said complaint case came to be registered for the said offences.
:4:
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused No.1 to 3 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent/State.
4. Perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and also the charge sheet material produced along with the petition. In the bail petition, the petitioners/accused No.1 to 3 have denied the case of the prosecution and they contended that because of the civil dispute in respect of landed property there is a false implication of the petitioners in this case. The alleged offences are all triable by the Magistrate Court and they are not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Now the investigation is completed and charge sheet is also filed. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioners can be admitted to anticipatory bail.
5. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent Police is directed to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.80/2016 :5: registered for the above said offence, subject to the following conditions:
i. Each petitioner has to execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and furnish one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting authority.
ii. Petitioners shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioners have to make themselves available before the IO for interrogation, as and when called for.
iv. Petitioners have to appear before the concerned Court within 30 days from the date of this order and to execute the personal bond and the surety bond.
Sd/-
JUDGE RHR/-