1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201348/2018

BETWEEN:

ANILKUMAR S/O SHIVARAJ BIRADAR

AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: PVT. WORK
R/O RAM NAGAR
KALABURAGI
...PETITIONER

(BY SRI MAHANTESH H. DESAI &

SMT.ANURADHA M. DESAI, ADVOCATES)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

THROUGH GRAMEEN POLICE STATION
REP. BY ADDL. S.P.P.
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION

439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ALLOW THE BAIL PETITION
AND RELEASE THE ACCUSED/PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
S.C.NO.128/2018 PENDING BEFORE THE V ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT KALABURAGI FOR
THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498(A),
 2

307, 504 OF IPC IN CR.NO.116/2017 OF GULBARGA

RURAL POLICE STATION.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned High Court Government Pleader.

2. Accused was granted bail by the Sessions

Court and after taking cognizance of the offence, learned

Magistrate issued summons on 22.06.2018. The report

submitted by the police indicates that said the summons

were not served on the accused. In spite of that, on

13.08.2018 learned Magistrate issued NBW to accused.

3. Thereafter the case was withdrawn and made

over to the court of Vth Addl. District and Sessions Judge,

Kalaburagi. On coming to know the pendency of NBW,

accused voluntarily appeared before the court and moved

an application for recall of NBW. Trial Court however,

rejected the bail application.

 3

4. There is nothing in the order sheet to indicate

that summons were served on the accused. There is also

no report with regard to the execution of NBW. Moreover,

accused himself voluntarily appeared before the Court.

Under the said circumstance, trial Court would have

recalled the warrant rather than taking him into custody.

Hence impugned order taking accused persons to custody

cannot be sustained. Consequently, rejection of the bail

application by the trial court cannot be sustained. Accused

is entitled for the benefit of the bail order issued by the

trial court.

5. Hence the following order:

Petition is allowed.

a. Petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on

bail on execution of fresh bond in a sum
of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for
the likesum to the satisfaction of the
court.
 4

b. Petitioner shall appear before the Court

as and when required.

c. Petitioner shall not threaten or allure the

prosecution witnesses in whatsoever
manner.

Sd/-
JUDGE

VNR