IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 7th DAY OF MARCH, 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. JAGANNATHAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10260/2011 BETWEEN: 1. Gangappa, S/o. Devendrappa Doddamani. Age: 29 years, 0cc: Agriculture R/o. Kamplikoppa Village Tq: Hubli 2. Mahadevappa, S/o. Devendrappa Doddamani, Age: 36 years 0cc: Agriculture R/o. Kamplikoppa Village Tq: Hubli 3. Manjunath, SI Devandrappa Doddamani, Age: 33 years 0cc: Agriculture R/o. Kamplikoppa Village Tq: Hubli 4. Mudukappa urf Sankappa S/ o . Basappa Kallammanavar Age: 28 years, 0cc: Agriculture R/o. Kamplikoppa Village Tq: Hubli PETITIONERS (By Sri. S. J. Nirmanik, Adv.) 2 AND: The State of Karnataka Police Inspector Hubli Rural Police Station (By Spi. P.P. High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench, Dharwad) RESPONDENT (By Sri. Vinayak S. Kulkarni, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 438 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO GRANT ANTICIPATORY BAIL TO THE PETITIONERS, DIRECTING THE HUBLI RURAL POLICE AUTHORITIES TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN HUBLI RURAL P.S. CRIME NO.291/2010 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 324, 504, 506, 307 R/W SEC.34 OF IPC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Heard the petitioners’ Counsel and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the State in respect of anticipatory bail sought by the petitioners against whom a case is registered in Crime No.291/2010 in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 324, 504, 506, 307 read with Section 34 of IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution in short is that, on 07.11.2010 at about 2.45 p.m. there was some altercation between the accused and the complainant and the accused persons assaulted the complainant and also complainant’s elder brother Nagappa with sticks, 3. The submission of the petitioners’ counsel is that, there are no overt acts mentioned against the petitioners in the complaint and moreover, the injured Nagappa sustained only simple injuries and was discharged from the hospital. 4. On the other hand, submission of the learned High Court Government Pleader is that, in the complaint, names of each accused is mentioned with their overt acts. 5. Having thus heard both sides and as charge sheet has not been submitted, referring to the complaint 4 allegations indicating overt acts against each one of the petitioners herein, in my view grant of anticipatory bail k444it at this juncture G+ei be in the interest of justice, as the investigation is in progress. 6. The petition is therefore rejected. But this will not come in the way of the petitioners moving trial court for regular bail. Sd! JUDGE gab/