Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/8940/2017 of SANNAGIDDAIAH Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 28 December 2017
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8940/2017 BETWEEN: SANNAGIDDAIAH S/O LATE JAWARAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/O MALALI VILLAGE HALEKOTE HOBLI HOLENARASIPURA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURUDATED THIS THE 28[TH]DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8940/2017
BETWEEN:
SANNAGIDDAIAH9/O LATE JAWARAIAHAGKD ABOUT 45 YBARSR/O MALALI VILLAGEHALEKOTE HOBLIHOLENARASIPURA TALUK~HASSAN DISTRICT — 573 211.
... PETITIONER|
(BY SRI CHETHAN B., ADV.)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKAHOLENARASIPURA CITY POLICK STATIONHASSAN DISTRICT — 573 211REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTORHIGH COURT OF KARNATAKABBNGALURU — 560 OO1.
~ .. RESPONDENT
(BY SRI K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO BNLARGE THR PETITIONER|ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.274/2017 OF HOLENARASIPURA|TOWN POLICE STATION, HASSAN DISTRICT FOR THE)OFFENCE P/U/S. 376 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,THERE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner undersection 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail inCrime No.274/2017 for the offences punishable undersection 376 of IPC registered by the respondent-Police. |
|The allegation against the accused is thatwhen the complainant was waiting for her husband,the accused made use of her husband’s absence.assaulted her and tried to outrage her modesty.During that time, the complainant shouted and atthat time, Prakash and Giddanna came there andon seeing them, the accused ran away. Sheinformed the same to them and filed a complaintagainst the accused.
3
3Heard the learned Counsel for thepetitioner and the learned High Court GovernmentPleader for the respondent/ State.
4Learned Counsel for the petitioner wouldsubmit that the petitioner has been victimized for afalse complaint in connection with water dispute.Hence, he may be enlarged on bail.
5 |I have given my sincere consideration tothe statement of the victim. The petitioner is injudicial custody since 30.09.2017. I do not find anyeround to allow this petition. Accordingly, petition is"rejected reserving liberty to the petitioner to makean application before the Sessions Judge ajiterexamination of the victim.
SA
Sd/-|
JUDGE |