1 IN THE HIGH COt.. RT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 26 D\ OF .JULY 2011 I3EFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.V.PINTO CRIMINAL PETITION No.I08fljJ01 1 Bet cen: Puttappa. Sb. Fakkirappa Naregal. Age: 35 years. 0cc: Agriculture. RIo. Maranbeed, Taluk: Hangal. District: Haven. . . .Petitioner (Bs Shri Patil M.H.. Adocate) And: Staic of Kan’ataka. By Adur Police. Rep. b Public’ Prosecutor. Circuit Bench. Dharwad. ...Respondent (By Shri Vinaak S. Kulkarni. H.C..G.Rj This criminal petition is filed tinder Section 438 ot the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to enlat ge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the etent of his arrest In the Adur Police in their Police St’tion Crime No.60/2011 punishable under Sections 354. 442. 504. 506(2) and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. This criminal petition coming on for orders this day. the Court made the following: - S - ORDER Heard Shri Patil M.H., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri Vinayak S. Kulkarni, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent — State. 2. This petition is filed seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.60/2011 of Adur Police Station registered on 28.05.2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 354. 442. 504. 506(2) and 307 of the Indian Penal code. It is stated in the complaint of one Kavitha. that she is residing in Hanagal and that the petitioner was teasing her, whenever he used to see her and she has narrated this fact to her father and also to her Möthër. In thu ëönnection the village people had - gathered a panchayath and the petitioner was advised by the panchayath not to harass the complainant. Despite that the petitioner was harassing and was making lewd gesture. against her. The petitioner used to threaten her saying that he would teach a lesson by assaulting with an axe. a 4 . - 0 — 3. It is further stated that on 27.05.2011 the petitioner called the complainant and asked her to come to him. At about 08:30 p.m., her parents had gone to the temple and the accused came to the house and he was trying to drag her. He was holding an axe in his hand and was about to assault her, the village people came running and rescued her from the hands of the petitioner. It is also alleged that the petitioner had waved the axe, but it did not cause any injury and one Ramesh though sustained minor injuries escaped from serious injuries. The accused thereafter ran awa from the scene of occurrence. On the basis of the above complaint the case has been registered. 4. It is seen that though the Police have cited Section 307 of the Indian Penal. no serious injuries has been caused to any person. Hence. I am of the opinion that the petitioner may be granted the relief sought for with the following conditions: - a 4 ORDER I) In the eent of arrest of the petitioner in Crime No.60 2011. the Police are directed to release the petitioner on bail, on his executing a personal bond for a sum Rs.25,000 with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. ii) The Investigating officer is at liberty to take the petitioner in custod5 for a period of ti’ o days for the purpose of recovery/identification. In those days. the petitioner shall be required to be in the Police custody in between 08:00 a.m. and 06:00 p.m. If the Investigating Officer requires the custod of the petitioner thereafter, he shall seek the custody from the jurisdictional Magistrate. iii) The petitioner shall not interfere w ith the complainant or her parents or the witnesses in the neighbour hood. If the petitioner found tampering any witnesses, the State is at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail granted herein and the Court before I. which such application is filed is at liberty to cancel the bail and commit him to custody without any further reference to this Court. sd/rn JUDGE Rsh