Sri Mohammed Riyaz @ Riyaz vs The State Of Karnataka on 15 December, 2010

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Mohammed Riyaz @ Riyaz vs The State Of Karnataka on 15 December, 2010

Bench: N.Ananda

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALOREi*._V

DATED THIS THE 15?" DAY OF DECEMBER 2;o'1oI;;5.'._jf  _

BEFORE

THE HON'B1_E MR. JUSTICE N._,A'I\i;.A"A,DA_'  
CRIMINAL PETITION .No.5'73Vé;'2o1oEii'-he it  it
BETWEEN: C'  A   V C'

SRI MOHAMMED RIYAZ  PIYAZ   ~ A '
S/0 Sri Ibrahim '' '    3
Aged about 22 years,
Residing at i\£o.5~8?',,__ _  _  ' 
Inili, Pavoor -- 574    "  

Mangalore Taiu!~%,.._  "    

D.K.DiStriCt. 1 .,   i  ,_  ' .. PETITIONER

AN

THE STATE Oi; i<-Iv3iARi\|;i\T/AKA?

" 'Rep. _bI}'. the Station' «H.o.I,ise Officer,
 Korarriang-E:iia_'P.o|ice Station,
'-Barfﬂqa-ioLre,<Citvy,.  .. RESPONDENT

A"~This_"CrtirnAinai Petition is filed under Section 438 of

 ' 'Cr.P.C.,..praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the
"Q"-..even,t of his arrest in Crime No.439/2010 of Koramangaia

PciiVcVe"'~Station, Bangaiore city, which is registered for an

 ,OffeI"I'C€"pUF1iShabie under section 392 I.P.C.

This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day,

   Court made the foilowing.



ORDER

The petitioner is arrayed as Accused No.439/2010 registered for an offence pun_i.s_h'a'bieifunider*1 section~392 of IPC.

2. Heard learned counse!__pfor petitioner i'aVnd:._jie=a.rnjed Government Advocate for the Sta.tVe';v.._

3. I have been taken rtif;e__'.'---investigation records. The firsit'ir:formatio:1 ~vvouid"ré've_a,l§'the 1" Accused, an ex~em-p~ioy:e'e5toil'1f§mp'i.re--..VHotei~~svi'tuate at Koramangaia alongwith--._ the' pywrongfully restrained the informant vviioi was-__carr'yi..n"g cash from Empire Hotel at .~w.i§orari1a.ng_aia_'to 'Er"npi.__r.e«Hote| at Castle Street at about 10

-..on__Vi9g'9.._201O and committed robbery of Rs.'1._,ﬂ4'E5',6'V9Oé;.'-'E'Which included cash of Rs.1,33,895/--, sodex . 'coupons. .VI5\s.1O,O3O/-, ticket restaurant coupons of Accused Nos.1 and 2 were chased and ___"?ap'p:reh'ended at the place of incident and the entire stolen 'iwamount was recovered from their possession and they were handed over to the Police Station. It appears during the interrogation both the accused have given the narne-'».of the petitioner as the one who had master robbery. As per the first information, the 15? f an ex employee of Empire Hotel and the hotel and also the cash tran_sactVi4o--n_s"of the'.--ho,t'eif. V confession statements were by the they were caught red-handed Thecofnfession statement made by piece of evidence. Ther;efore.,'Vwitihyouytigoi'ng:fin'to.._fi.irtfher details, the direction limited period to enable baii before the jurisdictioﬂnal 'Courtf if IinV'thV%_e resuit,.._I..pass the foliowing:

ORDER l"3e.ti'tionV is accepted. Petitioner is granted anticipatory '»bailV,'fs'u.bject to following conditions:

1) If petitioner is arrested in Crime No.439/2010 of Koramangala Police Station, Bangalore City, registered for an offence punishable under Section-392 of I.P.C., he shall be released on bail N. .

on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,0'£:.3:O/-- offering a surety for the likesum.

2) Petitioner shall not intimidate or tam._n§ri..yvétii the"

prosecution witnesses.

3) Petitioner for the purpose oft_i'ri~;estiga§--i,ioVn,: sh;a.l"l"

appear before the Invesijgating Gfficter} vvtieiriiever called upon to do so. '

4) This order would Aoijie.:ative:.ifoAr;~.a"period of two months 4f_r'o.r__ri todavy' petitioner shalt 4_Vseeit?freg.ii:i'aria.tiaiI__'._'Vbefo';9e'the jurisdictional Court. learned Judge of the shallifonsider baii appiication Without by observations made in this tgrider.'* _ so/1 EUEGE AA TGSS)"..*:

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court