IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.1280/2019 BETWEEN:
Balaram T.I., S/o Indrasingh, Aged about 27 years, R/at No.235, Bastihalli Compound, Goragondanahalli, Tiptur Town. ... Petitioner (By Sri Vijaya Kumar T.M., Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka, By Tiptur Town P.S., Represented by S.P.P., High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru – 560 001. ... Respondent (By Sri K.P. Yoganna, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.208/2013 of Tiptur Town Police Station, Tumkur for the offences p/u/s 307, 504 r/w Section 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on bail in connection with his detention pursuant to the proceedings in Crime No.208/2013 with respect to offences punishable under Sections 307, 504 r/w 34 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant’s brother-in-law was running a Hotel at Tiptur. It is stated that the petitioner along with the other accused had come to the Hotel for dinner and after diner, there was scuffle with regard to payment of bill with one Bharath who was the cashier. It is stated that in the said altercation, accused no.3 hit Bharath by hands, while accused no.2 assaulted Bharath with a chopper, accused no.1 had caught hold of Bharath and facilitated the assault. In the light of said incident, complaint was lodged, FIR was registered, investigation is complete and charge-sheet has been filed. It is noticed that after rejection of petitioner’s application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., for being enlarged on Anticipatory bail, the petitioner did not appear before the investigating authority.
3. The learned counsel for petitioner states that there was bonafide reason for not appearing before the investigating authority. It is further submitted that the imputation as per the charge sheet as regards inflicting of injury is against the accused no.2. It is further submitted that imputation as regards the petitioner herein is only that he had caught hold of CW.2 during the assault.
4. The learned HCGP states that the petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail in the light of his non-cooperation with the investigating authority and not having appeared before the investigating authority or before the court despite his application for anticipatory bail being rejected.
5. However, it is noticed that investigation is complete, charge sheet has been filed and imputation of inflicting of injury is primarily against the accused no.2. The imputation as against accused no.1 is that he had held CW.2 when the assault took place.
6. Taking note of the fact that charge sheet has been filed, investigation is complete, proof of offence being a matter for trial, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions.
7. In the result, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Sec. 439 of Cr.P.C., is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.208/2013 with respect to offences punishable under Sections 307, 504 r/w 34 of IPC subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of `1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(iv) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(v) The petitioner shall physically present himself and mark his attendance before the Station House Officer, Tiptur Town P.S., Tiptur Sub-division, Tumkur District, once in a month between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till conclusion of the trial.
(vi) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner, shall result in cancellation of bail.
Any observation made herein shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/- JUDGE Np/-