Sri.Mohit Agarwal vs State Of Karnataka on 31 July, 2017

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2017

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4787/2017

Between:

1. Sri. Mohit Agarwal
S/o Sri. Krishna Kumar Agarwal
Aged about 37 years
R/at Flat No. 1302
Purva Venezia
Yelahanka New Town
Bangalore- 560 64.

2. Sri. Krishna Kumar Agarwal
S/o B.M. Agarwal
Aged about 67 years

3. Smt. Manorama Agarwal
W/o Sri. Krishna Kumar Agarwal
Aged about 65 years

Both are R/at
No. Old DLF Colony Sector 14
Gurgoan
Haryan- 122 001.
…Petitioners
(By Smt. Padmavathi. N, Advocate)
2

And
State of Karnataka
Represented by Public Prosecutor
High Court of Karnataka
Bangalore-560001
By Yelahanka New Town Police Station
Bangalore-560064.
…Respondent
(By Sri. Chetan Desai, HCGP.)

This criminal petition is filed under Section 439(1)
of Cr.P.C praying to modify the bail conditions No.2 and
5 which was passed in Crl.Misc.No.2049/2017 dated
27.03.2017 passed by the learned XLV Addl. City Civil
and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in Cr.No.46/2017 for
the offences p/u/s 498(A), 506, 284 r/w 34 of
IPC
before the Yalahanka New Town Police, Bengaluru.

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

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and

the learned High Court Government Pleader for the

respondent-State.

2. The petitioners are before this Court seeking

relaxation of the conditions imposed on them by the

Sessions Court while granting anticipatory bail. The
3

complainant is none other than the wife of the petitioner

No.1. The petitioners No.2 and 3 are his parents.

READ  7] Shri Mava @ Sursing Pawara vs H on 17 October, 2012

3. The allegation is, the case is registered in

respect of offences punishable under Sections 498A,

506, 284 r/w 34 of IPC. The petitioner No.1 is aggrieved

by condition No.2 to the effect that he shall not leave

the jurisdiction of the concerned Court without prior

permission and Condition No.5 is, he shall mark his

attendance before the respondent-police station once in

fifteen days (preferably on Sundays).

4. Petitioners No.2 and 3 are aggrieved by the

condition that they shall mark their attendance before

the respondent police station once in a month

(preferably on Sundays) between 10.00 A.M. and 8.00

P.M till final report is submitted.

5. Smt. Padmavathi. N, learned counsel for the

petitioners submits that the petitioner No.1 is working
4

as a Software Engineer in a Private Company and

nature of his employment demands travel outside the

Bangaluru. Petitioners No.2 and 3 are residents of

Haryana and they cannot stay here at Bengaluru for

indefinite period.

6. As per the submissions at the Bar, so far

chargesheet is not filed; the order sought to be relaxed

is dated 27.03.2017; the nature of the allegation do not

demand the appearance of these petitioners before the

investigating officer for further period of investigation.

In that view of the matter, condition Nos. 2 and 5 are

relaxed subject to the petitioners furnishing the details

of their residential address and contact numbers to the

investigating officer.

Accordingly, petition is allowed.

Sd/-

JUDGE
DL

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *