Dismissed

Praveen S/O. Maruti Lohar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Sept 2018CRL.P/101117/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. sought anticipatory bail for two accused charged with offences including rioting, voluntary causing of grievous hurt, and assault. The court rejected the plea, noting the serious nature of injuries caused by one petitioner and the chaotic atmosphere created by the group.

What did the court decide?

The petition for anticipatory bail is dismissed. Office objections against the petitioners are overruled.

Praveen S/O. Maruti Lohar Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Karnataka HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 10^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION No.101117 OF 2018

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

PRAVEEN S/O. MARUTI LOHAR AGE:19 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS, R/O. LAXMI NAGAR, NIPPANI, DIST:BELAGAVI.

¶8

AKASH S/O. MARUTI LOHAR @ DABADE AGE:27 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS, R/O. LAXMI NAGAR, NIPPANI, DIST:BELAGAVI.

¶9

... PETITIONERS

¶10

(By Sri. VISHWANATH BADIGER ADV.)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, (BASAVESHWAR CHOWK P.S), HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, AT:DHARWAD.

¶13

... RESPONDENT

¶14

(By Sri.PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, HCGP)

¶15

: 2 : Crl.P. No.101117/2018

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Nos.1 AND 2 ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CONNECTION WITH CRIME NO.6/2018 REGISTERED BY BASAVESHWAR CHOWK POLICE STATION, NIPPANI, AGAINST PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED Nos.1 AND 2 AND OTHER ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325. 354 OF IPC.

¶17

This Petition coming on for Orders , this day the Court made the following:

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

Counsel submission on office objection Nos.1 and 2 is accepted. Office objection Nos.1 and 2 are over-ruled.

¶20

The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.6/2018 of Basaveshwar Chowk Police Station, Nippani. The said case is registered against the petitioners and 7 to 8 unknown accused for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 504, 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 354 & 325 of

¶21

: 3 : Crl.P. No.101117/2018

¶22

the Indian Penal Code, 1860 on the basis of the complaint of Amar Babasaheb.

¶23

It is alleged that on 27.01.2018 at 06.00 p.m., when petitioner No.1 in an intoxicated state was conducting in objectionable manner near Government Girls School, Kumbaragalli, Nippani, the complainant questioned him. Being enraged, petitioner No.1 abused him in foul language and secured the other accused. It is alleged that all the accused forming themselves into an unlawful assembly assaulted the complainant, when the residents of the locality by name Ganesh Ramesha Chavan, Vinayaka Vijaya Sulakude, Madhuri Ganesha Chavan, Archana Vinayaka Rawan, Vikas, Anuradha intervened to rescue the complainant, petitioner No.2 assaulted on the head of Ganesh Ramesha Chavan with centering bamboo fitted with nail and caused him grievous injury.

¶24

It is further alleged that another member of the said assembly assaulted Vinayaka on his head

¶25

: 4 : Crl.P. No.101117/2018

¶26

and face with tiles and the other members of the group assaulted Madhuri & Archana and attempted to outrage their modesty.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the overt-acts of assaulting with centering bamboo and tiles are not against petitioner No.1. He submits that imposing any stringent conditions, petitioners may be granted bail.

¶28

6. Learned HCGP furnishing the investigation

¶29

records opposes the bail petition.

¶30

The case diary records made available by the HCGP show that the victim Vinayaka has suffered comminuted displaced fracture of right frontal bone and wall of frontal ethmoid sinus, which is grievous in nature and another simple injury. He has also suffered injury on his right hand.

¶31

The allegations of wielding weapon and causing injury are against petitioner No.2. As per

¶32

: 5 : Crl.P. No.101117/2018

¶33

CD records and the statement of victims, petitioner No.1 is the source of the entire episode. The CD records show that the petitioners have created horror in the locality. The police have not been able to arrest them so far. In the circumstances, it is not a fit case to exercise the discretion to grant anticipatory bail. Therefore, petition is dismissed.

¶34

SD/JUDGE

¶35

RK/-

Praveen S/O. Maruti Lohar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen S/O. Maruti Lohar v. the State of Karnataka

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

Sri. Ranganayak S/O Ramanjanalu Tapela Vs the State

Shivanand Vs the State of Karnataka

Raju S S/O Babu Salunke Vs the State of Karnataka

Nagendra S/O. Satteppa Pujari Vs the State of Karnataka

Lakkappa S/O Peerappa Gudadar Vs the State of Karnataka

Priya Mangalamukhi @ Mehaboob Adoni Vs the State of Karnataka