Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

C Muniraju vs The State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|12 April, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9499/2018 BETWEEN:
C.Muniraju, S/o. Late Channappa, Aged about 35 years, R/at No.03, near Canara Bank ATM, Kempegowda Nagar, Honnaganahatti, Tavarakere, Bengaluru South Taluk-560090. ...Petitioner (By Sri. Mohan Kumar D, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka, By Byadarahalli Police Station, State Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru-560001. ...Respondent (By Smt. Namitha Mahesh B G, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.524/2018 of Byadarahalli Police Station, Ramanagara District for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R I.A.No.1/2019 has been filed by the petitioner- accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to release him on interim bail in Crime No.524/2018 of Bydarahalli Police Station, Ramanagara for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.
2. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is having a small child and has to got admit his child to the school, as already admissions have started. It is further submitted that the petitioner-accused is willing to sell his property due to discharge his debt, which is pending in the bank. It is his submission that he is having a site and the purchasers are willing to purchase his site. He wants to sell his site and thereafter, he will clear his dues which is pending and get released his house property, which has been seized by the bank. He further submits that if he does not clear his liability, his entire property will be put to auction by the bank and he will be permanently put to greater hardship. He is ready to face the trial, abide by any conditions that may be imposed on him by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner-accused on interim bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently submitted that the petitioner- accused is involved in a serious offence and if he is released on bail, he may abscond and he may not be available for the trial. On these grounds, she prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submission made by learned counsel for both the parties and perused the records.
7. On going through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it appears that already bank has seized the property and the petitioner-accused is intending to sell his another site property and clear his dues which is pending in the bank, to avoid auction of the said property from the bank. He is also intended to admit his child to the school.
Under the said facts and circumstances, I.A.No.1/2019 is allowed. Petitioner-accused is ordered to be released on interim bail for a period of one month from the date of his release, subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner-accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission.
3. He shall give his permanent address and shall mark his attendance once in a week between 10.00 a.m., to 5.00 p.m., to the jurisdictional police till he surrenders.
4. He shall undertake that immediately before one month, he will surrender before the Prison Authorities.
In view of the order passed on I.A.No.1/2019, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he will not press the petition and immediately after surrender, he will file a fresh petition.
Accordingly, criminal petition is disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition, if need be.
Sd/- JUDGE RB
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

C Muniraju vs The State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
12 April, 2019
Judges
  • B A Patil