Jiteen Arjun Kadam vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 August, 2017

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Jiteen Arjun Kadam vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 August, 2017

Bench: R.B Budihal

                        :1:



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                    DHARWAD BENCH

         DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2017

                         BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.

           CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101765 OF 2017


BETWEEN:
JITEEN ARJUN KADAM,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: TAILORING,
R/O. MARUTI GALLI, AT POST JAGALPETH,
TAL: JOIDA & DIST: KARWAD.
                                             ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.VISHWANATH BADIGER, ADVOCATE)


A N D:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (APMC YARD P.S.)
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH,
AT: DHARWAD.
                                         ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, HCGP)

      THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, PRAYING TO ALLOW
THIS PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3
ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.117 OF 2017 REGISTERED BY THE APMC
YARD POLICE STAION FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTION 363, 364(A), 368, 384 OF IPC AND SECTION 25(A) OF
INDIAN ARMS ACT 1957.

      THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                          :2:



                          ORDER

This petition is filed by petitioner/accused No.3 under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code seeking release on bail of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 363, 364A, 368, 384 of Indian Penal Code and Section 25(A) of the Indian Arms Act, registered in respondent/Police Station Crime No.117/2017.

2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.3 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State.

3. During the course of argument the learned counsel for petitioner made the submission that accused No.2 already approached this Court seeking his release on bail and this Court after considering the merits of the case ultimately allowed the bail petition of accused No.2, by order dated 01st day of August 2017 passed in Criminal Petition No.101398/2017. Learned counsel submitted that :3: similar set of allegations are made, even against the present petitioner/accused No.3.

4. The learned HCGP during the course of hearing made the submission that the recovery of the weapon is not from the present petitioner. I have perused the order passed by this Court in respect of accused No.2, the entire merits of the case were considered by this Court and ultimately the Court allowed the bail application in respect of accused No.2. Perusing the complaint averments similar set of allegations are made, even against the present petitioner. Hence on the ground of parity also the present petitioner is entitled to be granted with bail.

5. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The Petitioner/accused No.3 is ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.117/2017 registered by the respondent Police for the above said offences, subject to following conditions:

i. The petitioner shall execute a bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with likesum two sureties to the satisfaction of the committal Court as where the case in Crime No.117/2017 is pending.

:4:

ii. The petitioner shall co-operate with Investigating Officer during the course of investigation.


        iii.   The petitioner shall    not   tamper or
               hamper     the case     of    prosecution
               witnesses.

        iv.    The petitioner shall mark his attendance
               once in a month as per the English

monthly calendar in between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. for a period of six months before the concerned SHO.

v. The petitioner shall not indulge with any other criminal activities henceforth.

Sd/-

JUDGE RHR/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court