Allowed

K M Shivalingaiah v. State by Sub-Inspector of Police

Karnataka HC12 Dec 2014CRL.P/7558/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge criminal court granted anticipatory bail to multiple petitioners facing arrest in a criminal case arising from a violent land dispute involving allegations of unlawful assembly and assault causing serious injuries, noting the pendency of civil status quo matter and injuries to accused.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety each, subject to conditions of periodic appearance at police station and court.

K M Shivalingaiah Vs State by Sub-Inspector of Police — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

Crl.P 7558/14

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶4

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2014

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. PACHHAPURE

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION No.7558 OF 2014

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI K M SHIVALINGAIAH S/O MADAIAH @ DADIYAYYA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT MURUKANI DHAKALE H KOTHANUR KASABA HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶10

SRI MAHADEVAIAH S/O RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT MURUKANI DHAKALE H KOTHANUR,KASABA HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶11

SRI RAMAIAH @ RAMA S/O LATE MADAIAH AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT MURUKANI DHAKALE H KOTHANUR,KASABA HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶12

SRI NAGARAJU S/O MAHADEVAIAH @ DADIYAYYA

¶13

¶14

Crl.P 7558/14

¶15

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT MURUKANI DHAKALE H KOTHANUR,KASABA HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶16

SRI MARIYAYYA @ GADDAIAH S/O YALAVAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT MURUKANI DHAKALE H KOTHANUR,KASABA HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶17

SRI SHIVARAJU D S/O DADIYAYYA @ MADAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT MURUKANI DHAKALE H KOTHANUR, KASABA HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶18

SRI PUTTAMADAIAH S/O DADIYAYYA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT MURUKANI DHAKALE H KOTHANUR, KASABA HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶19

SMT ROOPA

¶20

W/O K M SHIVALINGAIAH AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT MURUKANI DHAKALE H KOTHANUR, KASABA HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶21

¶22

Crl.P 7558/14

¶23

SMT.LINGARAJAMMA W/O NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT MURUKANI DHAKALE H KOTHANUR,KASABA HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶24

VENKATALAKSHMI W/O MAHADEVAIAH AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT MURUKANI DHAKALE H KOTHANUR KASABA HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶25

SAKAMMA W/O MARIYAYYA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT MURUKANI DHAKALE H KOTHANUR KASABA HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶26

KEERTHI S/O NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS R/AT MURUKANI DHAKALE H KOTHANUR,KASABA HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶27

... PETITIONERS

¶28

(BY SRI: K R ANANTHA MURTHY, ADV)

Crl.P 7558/14

AND:

STATE BY SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE KANAKAPURA RURAL POLICE KANAKAPURA.

¶33

... RESPONDENT

¶34

(BY SRI:K NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)

¶35

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CRIME NO.179/14 OF KANAKAPURA RURAL P.S., RAMANAGARA, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 120(B), 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 447, 307 AND 149 OF IPC.

¶36

THIS CRL.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶37

O R D E R

¶38

The petitioners have approached this Court

¶39

for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in Cr.No.179/2014 of Kanakapura Rural Police Station registered for the offence punishable under Sections 120B, 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 447,307 read with Section 149 IPC.

¶40

The facts reveal that there is a

¶41

dispute in respect of Sy.Nos.95/3 and 97/3 between

¶42

¶43

Crl.P 7558/14

¶44

the petitioners and the complainant parties. The petitioners have filed the suit in Civil Court at Kanakapura and there is an order of status quo between the parties. On 08.08.2014, it is alleged that the petitioners formed an unlawful assembly and armed with clubs, knife, sickle etc., went to the land and said to have caused assault on the complainant and others. In the circumstances, the aforesaid crime was registered and the petitioners apprehending arrest in the said crime, are before this Court seeking bail.

¶45

Heard the learned Counsel for both the

¶46

parties.

¶47

It is the contention of learned Counsel

¶48

for the petitioners that the disputed lands are in the possession of petitioners and there was a quarrel between the complainant and petitioners for possession of properties and in that assault, petitioners have suffered injuries. Counsel submits that a complaint was filed by the

¶49

¶50

Crl.P 7558/14

¶51

petitioners and it is registered as Cr.No.182/2014

¶52

and a complaint against the petitioners was registered in Cr.No.179/2014. Learned Counsel submits that there was a delay in lodging the complaint for the reason that the petitioners were taken to the hospital for treatment and

¶53

thereafter, a complaint was filed. In the circumstances, he submits that there is an apprehension of arrest and seeks to grant anticipatory bail.

¶54

On the other hand, Learned High Court Government Pleader opposes the bail application.

¶55

Learned Counsel has made available the

¶56

record relating to the treatment taken by the petitioners in the hospital and it reveals that Mahadevaiah, the second petitioner has sustained

¶57

the fracture of 5^th metacarpal, Ramaiah, the third petitioner has suffered the fracture of right ulna, Mariyaiah, the fifth petitioner has suffered the fracture of right shaft of radius and

¶58

¶59

Crl.P 7558/14

¶60

Shivaraj, the sixth petitioner has suffered the fracture of right thumb and left shoulder and others have sustained simple injuries.

¶61

The question as to whether who was in possession of the properties is pending in the Civil Court and the complainant parties contend that the properties are their ancestral properties. As on the date of incident, the name of complainant was in the records by deleting the name of petitioners parties. Few years prior to the incident in respect of which there was a revenue proceedings at Deputy Commissioner, the matter came up to before this Court in writ petition. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners have suffered many fractures in the incident and accused No.2 has been granted bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.6046/2014 dated 28.10.2014, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where anticipatory bail has to be granted.

¶62

¶63

Crl.P 7558/14

¶64

Consequently, the petition is allowed.

¶65

In the event of the arrest of petitioners in Cr.No.179/2014 of Kanakapura Rural Police Station registered for the offence punishable under Sections 120B, 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 447,307 read with Section 149 IPC, they are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety each for the likesum to the satisfaction of arresting authority, with further following conditions:

¶66

a) Petitioners shall appear before the Kanakapura Rural Police Station within 10 days from today.

¶67

b) They shall mark their attendance in Kanakapura Rural Police Station once in a week on every Sunday inbetween 10.00 a.m. to 11.00 a.m., until further orders.

¶68

c) They shall co-operate for investigation.

¶69

¶70

Crl.P 7558/14

¶71

d) They shall attend the Court on

¶72

all the dates of hearing;

¶73

e) They shall not, directly or

¶74

indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶75

IA.2/2014 filed for interim bail does not

¶76

survive for consideration and hence, it is rejected.

¶77

Sd/JUDGE

¶78

*bgn/-

K M Shivalingaiah v. State by Sub-Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K M Shivalingaiah v. State by Sub-Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs Shraddha Vs State by Mangalore South Police Station

Sri Nayaz @ Nayaz Pasha Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Bande Manja @ H S Manjunath Vs State of Karnataka

Ramesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Sarojabai Vs State of Karnataka

Kottangada B Kariappa Vs the State of Karnataka by