p. —1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2011 BEFORE THE HONELE MR. JUSTICE V. JAGANNATHAN CRL.P.NO. 10474/2011 Between: 1. Vinod Chintamani Doddannavar, Age 23 years, 0cc.: Pvt. Service, 2. Kittu (. Ganesh Jogindarsingh Rajput, Aged 30 years, 0cc.: Pvt. Service, Both R/o. Behind Kapileshwar Temple, Belgaum. Petitioners (By Sri.Raniachandra Mali, Advocate) And: The State of Karnataka, Rep. by Khade Bazar Police, Belgaum, Now Rep. by State P.P., High Court of Karnataka Building, Circuit Bench, Dharwad. Respondent (By Sri.Anand K.Navalgimath, HCGP) This criminal petition is filed u/S.439 of Cr.P.C. seeking to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Khade Bazar P.S. crime No.126/20 10 registered for the offences p/u/s. 394 of IPC. This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following: ORDER Heard petitioners’ counsel Sri. Ramachandra Mali and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. 2. At the outset, the submission made by the petitioners’ counsel is that the petition is withdrawn in respect of the 1st petitioner, who is accused No.1. Therefore, only as regards 21I petitioner bail is sought. 3. The submission of the petitioners’ counsel is that, in respect of the incident said to have taken place on 7/9/2010 at about 9.30 p.m., when the complainant’s father was coming back to his house after daily collection, he was hit on the back of head and cash bag was taken away by some persons and, later on, the police have recovered the amount from four accused persons. The submission therefore made is that, so far as A-3 is concerned, he was similarly placed like A-2 and A-4 who are already given bail by this court and, as such, on the ground of parity, petitioner No.2 be released on bail. -3- 4, The submission of the learned High Court Government Pleader is that, the offence alleged is under Section 394 of the IPC and A-i assaulted the complainant’s father on the back of the head and thereafter the accused ran away with cash bag. Having regard to the nature of the overt act alleged, the petition be rejected is his submission. 5. Having thus heard both sides, and taking note of the fact that A-2 and A-4 are already on bail, and the 2’ petitioner i.e., A-3, also is said to be placed in a similar position, bail can be granted by imposing conditions. 6. In the result, the petition is allowed in respect of 2nd petitioner i.e., A-3, subject to following conditions: i) The 2nd petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial court. ii) He shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not give threat to the prosecution witnesses in any manner. -4- iii) He shall mark his attendance before the jurisdictional police station on every Wednesday and Saturday between 10.00 a.m and 5.00 p.m. iv) He shall not involve himself in the like offences in future. v) He shall not leave his place without prior permission of the jurisdictional Magistrate. vi) The petition is dismissed as not pressed as against the 1st petitioner is concerned. sal JUDGE V7!p*