Mobile View
Main Search Forums Advanced Search Disclaimer
User Queries
Karnataka High Court
Sri Manoj Padikkal vs State By White Field P S on 14 October, 2010
Author: V.Jagannathan

. M1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 1·4iT*"* DAY OF OCTOBER, 2010 C BEFORE

THE I~ION’BLE MRJUSTICE "VKJAGANNATI-IAl\I ` _ _ CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4965(2010 lW___ _0_`’ I BETWEEN: I [if A

1. Sri. Manoj Padikkal , CA Y ‘*wV It ».·A » I 0`·.OA It Aged about 39 years tu ` ` , A , I S/o P.Gopa1a Krishnan Nair ‘ _ 1 _; ` , Resident of#l\/LR.304 i ._ ‘ _ ` " F—Wing, Mittal Tower Residency _A ‘ M.G.Road A V———— "

Bangalore ——— 560 001, ‘ 1 _ ‘~.W

2. Sri.Ja1esh Kumar “ ._ I _A `·R· I _ I Major in Age' I ` a._W I

S/o T.P.BhagvaI,VSingh 5 — ·’°“

#101, AIpha_Carl_eston ._ V

Carleston · “

Coclx Toyyriit N l4tA° _ j

Bangalore; 1 U _`q‘ yv · ` _ .... PETITIONERS uSri>QV .Kumar, Adv.}

,. AE t.:W * It ., _.

°—State by White P.S. ,

I Represented Publice Prosecutor

I Offiee'o.f·the‘I’Xdvoeate General I Bangalore. A I WRESPONDENT

~ V`·» _ ` (By Sri.G.M.Srinivasa Reddy, HCGP) I Z At‘A TIIIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 ‘· , _ i CRPLC PRAYING THAT THIS I·ION’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO _ ».ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ‘-1_ _` ‘~V, _ ARREST IN CFLNO.223/10 OF WHITE FIELD PS., BANGALORE CITY, WHICH IS REGD., FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 3(A) & (B}, 4, 5, 7, OF ' PIT ACT.

a -2-

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

0 R D E R . "

Heard both sides in respect of the anticiplstjoiy petition filed by accused Nos.13 and 14 who are arriongstl ’ accused persons whom the accused has been tanderl C Section 3(ii) [a)(b), 4, 5 & '7 of ln1moral_'llrai`fic 1956. I p ‘· &—“o_ pq I q

2. Submission of [.iCtiT.lO1'iCI`$tl.A¢O`i§i}-SC} Sri is that, petitioners are the Directors of the__pCo1npariyl`known as "Fruit Wellness & engaged in the business of Herbal Beauty__p'}` Iiitéissgggs, Spa Treatments etc. and th€Y 3Y€iili alleged offences and more over the other —pe‘rsons`are already on bail, following the trial Court graiitingiltFi»;a‘a`-panticipatoiy bail. uheard the p€tmOH€y’s, counsel wid 3130 thc Government Pleader for the State and in S V tu viewlof the accused persons, acc-used Nos.} to 12 and accused 4 iiqp 15 being reieased on anticipatory bail by the trial Court, I am V , __ ~l,,'_ ll_l··-lofltlieitiview that, the petitioners can be directed to approach the 1 C ' ~ ll.l V 1 W ` trial Court for regular bail by granting the anticipatory bail. S l.·l 4. In the result, the petition is allowed. ln the event of petitioners being arrested in Crime No.223/20lO of White Field Q

4

t v ·3·

police, they shall be released on bail on executing personal bond for Rs.50,000/— each with two sureties to the satisfaction of the arresting police officer. Petitioners shall not tamperdlvith evidence and shall not hamper investigation in ·‘,4 1 Petitioners shall mark their attendance before ,4 police on every Sunday at any time between llli· 1 p.m. and shall also co—operate withihe investigating lagency; ‘

5. Petitioners shall niove t1¤·§llitl»ia1‘·—c4Ouft` withirii 25 days from the date of this order till such time, this order shall be force. y·‘“` H a._W ll I Wl_l 1 A 2 ~ gi y·—“.. — t··, __ . ]-udge t t j to so