Karnataka High Court
Chandrappa Shivappa Idigoudra vs State Of Karnataka on 27 February, 2013
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.V.PINTO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10258/2013
BETWEEN:
Chandrappa Shivappa Idigoudra,
Son of Shivappa Idigoudra,
Aged about 32 years,
Resident of Mevundi Village,
Haveri Taluk and District.
... PETITIONER
(By Sri.M.V.Hiremath & Sri.V.S.Kalasurmath, Advocates)
AND:
State of Karnataka,
By its Guttal Police Station,
Represented by Public
Prosecutor, Haveri.
... RESPONDENT
(By Shri Vinayak S. Kulkarni, HCGP)
This criminal petition is filed under section 438 of
Cr.P.C. seeking to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail
in Crime No.152/2012 on the file of Guttal Police Station,
Haveri Taluk and District for the offences punishable under
-2-
Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 451, 302, 307, 323 and 324 of
IPC.
This criminal petition coming on for orders this day, the
Court made the following:
ORDER
This criminal petition is filed seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.152/2012 of Guttal Police Station, Haveri, registered on 05.12.2012 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 451, 302, 307, 323 and 324 of IPC.
2. It is the case of the complainant Sri.Maruti Kari that there was enmity between the complainant and the accused family in respect of the property. It is stated that on 05.12.2012 at about 7:30 a.m. the petitioner along with the other accused persons came to the house of the complainant holding weapons like iron-kuda and iron rod, by forming themselves into a group and thereafter, they assaulted the deceased-Honnappa by means of the said weapons. The -3- specific allegation against the petitioner-Chandrappa is that he has assaulted the complainant by hands and whereas the other accused assaulted the deceased with the weapons on their head and on the other parts of the body. It is stated that the said Honnappa sustained grievous injuries and he succumbed to the injuries subsequently. Thereafter, an offence under Section 302 of IPC is made out.
3. Heard Sri. M.V.Hiremath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also Sri.Vinayak S. Kulkarni, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
4. The learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the matter is still under investigation and that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required.
5. I have gone through the averments in the complaint. Having regard to the specific role attributed to the petitioner, I am of the considered opinion that the limited anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. -4-
6. Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed with the following conditions:
i) In the event of the arrest of the petitioner in Crime No.152/2012 of Guttal Police Station, Haveri, the Arresting Officer is directed to release the petitioner on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-
with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer;
ii) The petitioner shall surrender before the Police within ten days from today;
iii) The arresting Police are at liberty to detain the petitioner for a period of 3 days in the police custody for the purpose of recovery/ identification/investigation and in those days, the petitioners shall be required to be in Police Station only between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.;
iv) Petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Magistrate within 15 days thereafter and file an application for regular bail. If the application is filed, the learned Magistrate is hereby directed to dispose of -5- the application on merits without being influenced by the order passed by this Court.
Sd/-
JUDGE Vnp*