Allowed

Vittal S/O Laxmappa Nadagoudra v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Nov 2019CRL.P/101970/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed an anticipatory bail petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for a petitioner arrayed as accused No. 7 in a case involving offences under Sections 153-A, 292, 149 IPC and Section 67 IT Act, ordering his release upon arrest subject to surety and conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest, conditioned upon appearing in ten days, furnishing a self-bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, and not tampering with witnesses.

Vittal S/O Laxmappa Nadagoudra Vs the State of Karnataka — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.G.M.PATIL

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101970/2019

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

VITTAL S/O LAXMAPPA NADAGOUDRA, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: CHIPPALAKATTI VILLAGE, TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN: 591 123.

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI.PRASHANT MATHAPATI ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH KATKOL POLICE, REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH DHARWAD.

¶13

... RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SMT.SEEMA SHIVA NAIK, HCGP)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT POLICE TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER / (A-7) ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CRIME NO.21 OF 2019 IN CC NO.203 OF 2019 ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC RAMADURG FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 153A AND 292 R/W SECTION 149 OF IPC AND SEC. 67 OF IT ACT, IN SO FAR IS PETITIONER / ACCUSED - 7 CONCERNED.

¶16

¶17

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This is an anticipatory bail petition filed

¶20

under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for enlargement of

¶21

the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.21/2019 of Katkol Police Station now pending in C.C.No.203/2019 on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, Ramdurg for the offences punishable under Sections 153-A and 292 read with Section 149 of IPC and Section 67 of Information and Technology Act.

¶22

The case of the prosecution in brief is that the ASI of Katkol Police Station registered his own complaint on 22.02.2019 at 8.00 p.m. on the report from CPC No.1094. He informed the complainant that someone have posted photograph depicting bull with Pakistan flag mating cow with Indian flag in Whatsapp group

¶23

¶24

“Bhagiratha Snehitaru”. On enquiry, it came to the light that accused Nos.1 and 2 along with two others were in the group as admins. They had checked the messages and posted in the said group. He found that on 21.02.2019 at about 9.32. p.m. member named as “KA-48 4481V” had posted image depicting Hindu Youth with Indian flag mating a girl with Pakistan flag with a caption in Hindi “Tumari Ma Ki Kasam send karo Hindustan Jindabad”. The police officer on enquiry with accused Nos.1 to 6 found that the accused who were amongst the group members protesting against the said post, registered the crime and proceeded with the investigation and after completing the investigation has filed the charge sheet showing the accused No.7 as absconding.

¶25

¶26

The petitioner who is arrayed as

¶27

accused No.7 in the charge sheet has stated that he has no nexus with the alleged offences. His name has been included in the charge sheet which is illegal and abuse of process of law. He is ready to co-operate with the investigation and trial and he undertakes to appear before the Court regularly. He is ready and willing to abide by the conditions which may be imposed by this Court and also to furnish surety to the satisfaction of the Court.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP.

¶29

Admittedly, the name of the petitioner does not find place in the FIR registered by the police officer. In the course of investigation it was found that the petitioner herein is also a member in the Whatsapp group wherein the

¶30

¶31

alleged photograph was posted. It is admitted that the other accused have been enlarged on bail. The alleged offence is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and is triable by the Court of JMFC. It is not disputed that the accused is a permanent resident of Chippalakatti village, Ramdurg, Belagavi having movable and immovable properties and residing with his kith and kin. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition deserves to be allowed and the petitioner may be enlarged on anticipatory bail subject to imposing certain conditions to see that he will appear before the Court regularly and will not tamper the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial of the case.

¶32

¶33

Accordingly, this Court proceed to

¶34

pass the following:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

The anticipatory bail petition filed under section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. The petitioner

¶37

is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.21/2019 of Katkol Police Station now pending in C.C.No.203/2019 on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Ramdurg, on the following conditions:

¶38

The petitioner is directed to appear before the jurisdictional Magistrate within 10 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶39

On appearance of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a self bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties for the

¶40

¶41

likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate.

¶42

The petitioner shall not threaten or try to tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶43

The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court regularly and cooperate in concluding the trial at the earliest.

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

¶45

Vittal S/O Laxmappa Nadagoudra v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vittal S/O Laxmappa Nadagoudra 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

Anand Vs State of Karnataka

Shri.Pandurang S/O Ganapati Kamkar Vs the State of Karnataka

Yaseen S/O Dastagir Malidwale Vs Azizkhan S/O Lazam Tajoddin

Sri.Rakesh @ Rakhi Son of Tayappa Vs State of Karnataka

Sri.Sunil S/O Sidram Kshetri Vs the State of Karnataka

Basappa @ Basavaraja @ Bassi Vs the State of Karnataka