Noorahmed Imqmwqg Gove vs The State Of Karnataka on 26 August, 2010

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Noorahmed Imqmwqg Gove vs The State Of Karnataka on 26 August, 2010

E

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DI-IARWAD

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF' AUGUST 2o_41~0_f'-«...'_J*~..V

BEFORE

THE I-ION'BLE MR. JUsTICEH5RALI-"N'Ai§AfeAvJ_ 1'

CRIMINAL PETITION I\I=Q.7190.é/':2,;II.'I§"  

CRIMINAL PETITI.ON__ NO_'7.9G3/2I.G'£Qj,'__VV 

CRIMINAL PETITION No.79o2"}2.g51o
BETWEEN: V A

1. Noorahmed 1ma.r:1,sa.b'«Gko'Ife,  V. 'I 
Age: 4-4_ y.<:2I-rs, ::()QC'5jB-U S'1 11(2SS}
R/0 IIII:eI;:1;eIg.e~~.va.dI;.,    '
Tq 86:' DiVS'1t='kII3*¢1g'a.?u " . 

2. M_aiI3 udVc"i:'.I:V. _»  b Gh atwale,
Age: 40 ye'aI__"'s._, 'O__C'c;.»'BusI'ness,
R / 0* HiIreb'a_g 'eIw=ad_;'.,

 Tvq 85 "DiV_StV:..Bel"gai1m. ...P€'E;itiO}.'163]."S

 ~._(3yi-.§ri.,;'IVIswan'éI{'h"Badiger, Advocate.)

     

T1rIe.4_Sta,~t~é_  Karnataka

j Pres'e;'I3tr:d' by its,
  "State Public Prosecutor,(Hirebagewadi P.S.)
. ' ..ﬂHAI.ghA Court of Karnataka,
 _ C'I'r..r*.IIIt Bench,Dharwad. ...ResporIdent

  Sri .\/Inayak S Kulkarni, HCGP)

FM



!'J

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section
439 Cr.P.C. seeking to enlarge the petitioners on
bail in Cri.No.44/2010 registered  the
Hirebagewadi Police Station for the "of'fe;11_cve

punishable under Section 143, 

307,302,109 R/W149 of IPC.
CRIMINAL PETITION No.79o3'/'2o«1p7__  V
BETWEEN: S S S 'S S

Shabuddin Gottsesab Ban--3,;a--pur ' p 

Age: Major, Occ: Business/"Agricuit'L;i.re, V

R/o, Hirebagewadi,*'T_aE &i"'D'is'tt Beigauvm 
(Accused No.11)   _     ...Petitioner

(By S ri . Vi swanath  ger';  c;aie§)

AND:

The State. ofivi{a_r'npata'k~a_ . '
PreseIite'd_ by it.<.§",e«.   
State Public P'ro"sec..u"t----0r,
(Hirebagewadit P-..S;--.) 
High Court "0f_Karnataka,

 "  _ACir_c'ui;t.i,pBench;I3'h--a'rwad. ...Respondent

 s Kulkarni, HCGP)

is  Thisojatiriminal Petition is filed under Section
438"' C'---r.P.'C. seeking to grant the anticipatory

.._W.baii "to? the petitioner in Crime No.44/2010,
')3,r'eg.i4_stered by the Hirebagewadi Poiice Station for

 " .ti<1_e offence punishable under Sections 143, E47,
 11:43', 307', 302, 109 read with 149 of IPC.

e___('=-a..-as-*"'



U}

These Criminal Petitions coming or:__ for
orders this day, the Court made the fo11owinig':'--.T

COMMON ORDER

Both these petitions, have arisen':froriiis:'t---hie'-*--si* same Crime No.44/201.0 of Station, Belgaum District. wipes :o:~*imirig;'1..ié¢ii%;jio}i;--} 140.7902/2010 is by 2¥ici.¢:os:ii\E._ndA.V'si;bsVeq:uiehVt"'nail petition filed under,----SzeCti,on14:39"-»of Cri.¥HACA;V§before this Court. These filed their earlier petition-n '--i._1nc§iAer_,iSeec-tioi'r'ii._u4'3*;3 of Cr.P.C. in Criminat N.o;--77ii9AiO;3";52'i)1O. Copy of order dated on the said petition is producedi;"~«.Tf1is 'Co~'t,ir't--;after considering the said

-"'~._Vpe:i_tio;n_ on meirivt-s«"rejected it and no acceptabie are made out by them in the p.re_sent_."}i§etiition. Therefore, Criminal Petition V"'-..._i*..No.79'Qi21./2010 filed by the accused Nos.4 and 2 "':iije.eej:_*tive1y deserves to be rejected. ,---.f"""""""

2. The petitioner in Criminal Petition No.'7903/2010 is accused No.11 in the sai_d~.c'a,ise_. It is not in dispute that there is no overt act track of any a.s»s»a_Lilt.".aiga'iifi»sit"

petitioner (A11) either in the:"'«co:iripiVlair2t"or statements of charge she-e4t~»..witri"esse.s§V-.Th_e'r"eifore, "

it cannot be held that thie're"fis*prima'facie case against this petitioﬁ_e'1'i't..{:4"it:l1p)'Vifor".ethe offence punishabie

3. dispute that except accused__No;'i2v,p..§t:'<.arzcli"'6__and the present accused No.11, ailliother against whom there are no_;a1'legatio'i1swof "over acts of assault on the :Adecieaseig:i,"A"are granted bail. Therefore, I do not reasons to reject the petition of accaupsefid. No.11. Hence the following:

~ ORDER The present CrI.P.NoX7902/2010 accused N032 and 4 in the said casefis rejected. Criminal Petition under Secﬁon 438 ofcnap.c}tg?"acéu§ca.N§;{ii in the said case is h_ereb§"~~a11oWed; "

of his arrest in said ti'1ﬁé'i"i3ev't§itioner shall be enlarged a self bond for surety for the of the police officer arresting' condi tions that: i i V 'V V i

a) he_s_ha11d"no't vdi:reC_tiy"i or indirectly thireaten,_':L_'t:he__iAV' p;'osecut_i..o.:1 witnesses nor shérllu __ with the prosecution Sdf--

JUDGE

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court

Noorahmed Imqmwqg Gove vs The State Of Karnataka on 26 August, 2010