Narasimha Acharya vs State Of Karnataka on 17 November, 2017

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2017
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8413/2017
BETWEEN:

NARASIMHA ACHARYA
S/O LATE NAGAPPA ACHARYA
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS
R/O THONNASE, ALBADI VILLAGE,
KUNDAPURA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT 576201.
…PETITIONER

(BY SRI.RAJU BHAT
SRI YASHWANTH SAJJAN GOWDAR, ADVS.)

AND

STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY SHANKARANARAYANA PS
KUNDAPURA CIRCLE, KUNDAPURA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTICT-576201
REPRESENTED BY GOVT PLEADER,
HIGH COURT BENGALURU
BENGALURU-560001
…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.CHETAN DESAI, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETR. ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.190/2017 OF SHANKARNARAYANA P.S., UDUPI
2

DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 306,498A R/W 34 OF
IPC.

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

ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused

No.2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on

bail of the offences punishable under Sections 306,

498A read with Section 34 of IPC, registered in

respondent – police station Crime No.190/2017.

2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner/accused No.2 and also the

learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for

the respondent-State.

3. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail

petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on

record.

3

4. The complaint averments shows that

accused Nos.1 and 2, who are the father and son, were

quarrelling with each other in connection with the

property matter. There is also allegation that accused

No.1 and the petitioner were giving ill-treatment and

harassment to the deceased in connection with the

property matter. The further averments in the

complaint show that, suspicion has been raised that

because of the abetment by the petitioner and his son,

the deceased might have committed suicide. On the

basis of the said complaint, case came to be registered

for the alleged offence.

5. Looking to the very complaint averments,

there are no specific allegation as against the petitioner

that for what reason he used to give ill-treatment and

harassment to the deceased, only vague allegations are

made and the petitioner herein denied the allegations
4

and the story of the prosecution contending that he has

been falsely implicated in the case. Petitioner has also

undertaken that he is ready to abide by any conditions

to be imposed by this Court. Petitioner is in custody

since from the date of his arrest. The alleged offence is

also not exclusively punishable with death or

imprisonment for life. Though there are some

allegations against accused No.1, the husband of the

deceased, he has already been granted with bail by the

order of the learned sessions Judge. Petitioner is aged

about 73 years, which fact is not disputed by the

prosecution. Hence, I am of the opinion that petitioner

can be enlarged on bail by imposing reasonable

conditions.

6. Accordingly, petition is allowed.

Petitioner/accused No.2 is ordered to be released on

bail for the offence punishable under Sections 306,
5

498A read with Section 34 of IPC, registered in

respondent – police station Crime No.190/2017, subject

to the following conditions:

i. Petitioner has to execute a personal
bond for Rs.1,00,000/- and has to
furnish one surety for the likesum to
the satisfaction of the concerned Court.

ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of
the prosecution witnesses, directly or
indirectly.

iii. Petitioner has to appear before the
concerned Court regularly.

Sd/-

JUDGE

BSR

Leave a Comment

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