Karnataka High Court

CRL.P/8477/2015 of NAGESH Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 31 December 2015

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2015 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MANOHAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8477/2015 BETWEEN: 1. NAGESH S/O. K. NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS 2. VENKATESH S/O. MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS 3. NAVEEN S/O. NAGARAJAPPA AGED ABOUT

IN THER HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATLBD THIS THE 3[ST]DAY OF DECEMBER 2015.

BEEFEOR

THE HON'’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MANOHAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8477/2015

BEITIWEEN

1. |NAGESHS/O. K. NARAYANAPPAS/O. K. NARAYANAPPA

AGEI)D ABOUT 22 YKEA

oDVENKATESHS/O. MUNITYAPPAS/O. MUNITYAPPA

AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS

4 |NAVEEN

S/O. NAGARAJAPPAAGEI)D ABOUT 24 YREAAGEI)D ABOUT 24 YREA

ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF

RACHENAHALLI VILLAGEBASKHEBITYHALLI HOBLISIDLAGHATTA TALUK.BASKHEBITYHALLI HOBLISIDLAGHATTA TALUK.

CHIC KABALLAPUR DISTRICT — 562 105

.. PETITIONERS|

(BY SRI VEERANNA G.TIGADI, ADV.)

AN D

STATE OF KARNATAKA ©REPRESENTED BY|

INSPECTOR OF POLICE,SIDLAGHATTA RURAL POLICE/SUB-INSPECTOR|SIDLAGHATTA, |

CHICKBALLAPUR DISTRICT — 562 105)

— RESPONDENT

(BY SRI K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP.)

Page 1 of 3

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.438 CR.P.CPRAYING TO BNLARGE THER PEIITIONERS ON BAIL INTHE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.344/2015 OFSHIDLAGHATTA.RURAL.POLICEHSTATION,CHICKBALLAPURA DISTRICT, FOR THE OFFENCES|P/U/Ss.135 AND 136 OF INDIAN ELECTRICITY ACT.

THIS CRIMINAL PERIITION COMING ON FORORDERS|THISDAY,THE.COURT,MADE,THE.FOLLOWING:ORDER

The petitioners ate accused Nos.2 to 4 in = crimNo.344/2015 have filed this petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

seeking anticipatory bail for the offences punishable under Sections|135 and 136 of Indian Electricity Act, 2003.

2. The case of the prosecution 1s:

OneH.V.Venugopal,JuniorEngineer,|BESCOM, Dibburahalli Branch, Shidlaghatta ‘Taluk, had lodged a complaintallegcinge that on 25.11.2015, in the night, some persons hav committed theft of electrical wires installed 1n the way to|Kundarlagurki and Pallicherlu 11 KV electric wire line. On thebasis of the said complaint, the police have registered a case in|Crime No.344/2015, against the petitioners herein. The petitionersfiled application before the Second Additional District and SessionsJudge, Chickaballapur, seeking anticipatory bail. The learned Judge,rejected the application on 08.12.2015. Hence, the petitioners have,approached this Coutt.

4. Stt Veeranna G.Tigadi, learned Counsel for the petitionerscontended that the petitioners are not involved in any of the|offences alleged against them. They have been falsely implicated in|the case. In the complaint also, his name is not included. Thepetitioners are permanent residents of the village and they are readyto abide any of the conditions that may be 1mposed by the Court|and seek for anticipatory bail.

5. Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing forthe respondent opposed for granting the bail on the ground that, they are involved in the theft of electrical wire and sought for,dismissal of the petition.

6. I have carefully considered the arguments addressed bythe learned Counsel appearing for both the parties and perused thecopy of the complainant as well as the FIR. ©

Page 2 of 3

7. In the complaint lodged by H.V.Venugopal, JuniorEngineer, BESCOM, he has not mentioned the names of any ofthe petitioners. Even in FIR also, the names of the petitioners are|not mentioned. The police have falsely included their names andthat apart, the police have also not recovered the stolen goods.Only on the apprehension, the respectable persons of the villagecannot be arrested and hence, the petitioners are entitled for bail.

8. Accordingly, I pass the following order:

a. The petition is allowed. |

b. The respondent is directed to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest for the alleged offences, subject tofollowing conditions:

1. Each of the petitioners shall execute a|personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and furnishone surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of theconcerned Coutt.

u. Petitioners shall not tamper with the|prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.|

Wi. Petitioners have to make themselves|availableTO.the.Investigating|Officerfor.interrogation as and when they are called for.

tv. Petitioners shall not leave the limits of the|jurisdictional police without permission.

v. Petitioners shall surrender betore theconcerned Court within a period of two weeks andexecute personal bonds with sureties. |

Any violation of the conditions imposed above, would enable the prosecution to seek for cancellation of bail.

Sd/-.

JUDGE |

Page 3 of 3

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead