Karnataka High Court
Shri. Kallappa Sadeppa Golihalli vs The State Of Karnataka (Nandgad P.S.), on 24 September, 2013
Author: Anand Byrareddy
Bench: Anand Byrareddy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2013
BEFORE
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION No.11226/2013
BETWEEN:
1. Shri.Kallappa Sadeppa Golihalli,
Aged about 26 years, Occ: Agriculture,
2. Shri.Basappa Rudrappa Golihalli,
Aged about 55 years, Occ: Agriculture,
3. Shri. Uday Irappa Golihalli,
Aged about 35 years, Occ: Agriculture,
4. Shri.Babu Shivappa Golihalli,
Aged about 45 years, Occ: Agriculture,
5. Shri.Kallappa Shivappa Golihalli,
Aged about 39 years, Occ: Agriculture,
Petitioners 1 to 5 are all r/o Hireangrolli,
Tq.Khanapur.
...PETITIONERS
(By Shri.Ashok R.Kalyanashetty, Advocate)
AND:
The State of Karnataka (Nandgad P.S.),
By its State Public Prosecutor,
2
Advocate General's Office,
High Court Bench premises, Dharwad.
...RESPONDENT
(By Shri.V.M.Banakar, Additional State Public Prosecutor)
---
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 seeking to enlarge the petitioners on bail on
such terms and conditions as deemed fit in Nandgad P.S. Crime
No.3/2013 (S.C.No.132/2013-I Additional Sessions Court Belgaum)
for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 324, 302, 307,
504, 506 and 109 read with Section 149 of IPC.
This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the
following:
ORDER
The petitioners are accused amongst others for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 324, 302, 307,504, 506 and 109 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'I.P.C.', for brevity). It transpires that the present petitioners and the complainant and his family are related. There was a dispute over landed property, and on the allegations that the present petitioners and others sought to implicate the complainant and his family of seeking to commit the theft of forest property. The petitioners had come with the deadly weapons and with premeditation to attack the complainant and his family. As a result of which, 3 serious injuries were caused and several of the victims succumbed to the injuries. It is in that background, a case has been registered against the present petitioners. Insofar as petitioner Nos.3 and 5 are concerned, there are allegations and overt acts alleged against the said petitioners. But, insofar as the other petitioners, who are arraigned as accused Nos.2, 3 and 5 are concerned, there is a counter case filed by accused No.2, against the complainant and his family, notwithstanding the same, the overt acts alleged against these petitioners are not specific and therefore, the said petitioners have made out a case for enlargement on bail, though the Court below has taken a strict view, in view of the dare-devilry of the petitioners and their group. Therefore, the petitioners Nos.1, 2 and 4 shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing a self bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- each, along with solvent surety each, for a like sum, subject to the following conditions:
i) The petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 4 shall not leave the jurisdictional of the trial Court without seeking leave of that Court.4
ii) The petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 4 shall attend the Court on all dates of hearing.
iii) The petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 4 shall not influence or seek to threaten the prosecution witnesses in any manner.
The bail petition in respect of petitioner Nos.3 and 5, are permitted to be withdrawn, at the request of the counsel for the petitioners.
SD/-
JUDGE MBS/-