IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.9586/2016 BETWEEN:
1. DHANARAJ @ DHANA @ DHANUSH S/O.SATHYA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS R/AT # 3/397, HANUMANTHANAGAR BAGALUR ROAD, HOSUR TALUK KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT PIN: 635 103 2. SHIVA S/O.RAJENDRA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/AT #32, OPP. BANASHANKARI TEMPLE M.G.R. JOPADI,BANASHANKARI KANAKAPURA ROAD BENGALURU - 560 078 (BOTH ARE IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY) …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND :
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY H.S.R.LAYOUT POLICE STATION BENGALURU - 560 102 REP. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU – 560 001 RESPONDENT (BY SRI.S.VISHWA MURTHY, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETR. ON BAIL IN CR.NO.552/2016 OF H.S.R. LAYOUT P.S., BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 397 OF IPC.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER This petition under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is filed seeking enlargement of petitioners on bail in Crime No.552/2016, registered in H.S.R. Layout Police Station for offence punishable under Section 397 of IPC.
2. Shri Naveen Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioners adverting to the complaint submits that the complaint is filed against unknown persons. After investigation, the charge sheet has been filed by police. He has placed a copy of charge sheet for perusal of this Court. Drawing attention of this Court to the charge sheet, he submits that admittedly, the petitioners were in judicial custody in some other case and they were secured by a investigating officer under a body warrant. Therefore, the claim of the police to have recovered a sum of Rs.2,000/- out of Rs.42,000/- from the petitioners is wholly unbelievable and police have filed this false case only to implicate the petitioners to close another criminal case. Accordingly, he prays for allowing this petition.
3. Opposing the bail petition, the learned HCGP submits that accused No.1 is from Krishnagiri District and if the accused are released on bail, it may hamper the trial. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of this petition.
4. I have carefully considered the submissions of the learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned HCGP & perused the material papers.
5. Admittedly, the petitioners were in judicial custody from 4.10.2016 in some other case. The incident in question has taken place on 3.8.2016 at about 3.40 P.M. The complaint is lodged on the following day at 1.00 P.M. Charge sheet does not disclose any details with regard to recovery and investigation is complete. Further, the offence alleged is not punishable with death or life imprisonment. Therefore, in my view, this petition merits consideration and deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, it is directed that:
(i) Petitioners shall be released on bail in Crime No.552/2016 registered in HSR Layout Police Station upon their executing a self bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- each with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;
(ii) Petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during the further course of investigation, if any and appear before him as and when called upon;
(iii) Petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to prosecution witness or any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or investigating officer;
iv) Petitioners shall not involve themselves in any criminal activities; and (v) If the petitioners violate any one of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail.
Petition allowed.
Sd/- JUDGE Yn.