IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26th DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION No.6316/2018 BETWEEN:
Hanumantha S/o Chikkannaiah Aged about 27 years R/o Rajeevgandhipura Ramanagaram District-581 453.
(By Sri G.B.Nandishgowda, Advocate for Sri R.B. Sadasivappa, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka by Amruthur Police Represented by the State Public Prosecutor High Court Buildings Bengaluru-560 001.
(By Sri M.Divakar Maddur, HCGP) …Petitioner …Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.106/2018 of Amruthur Police Station, Tumakuru District for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 506 and 427 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of Explosives Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:-
O R D E R The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/ accused No.2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. to release him on bail in Crime No.106/2018 of Amruthur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 506, 427 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. The geneses of the complaint are that on 30.5.2018 at about 12.10 p.m. complainant appeared before the police and filed the complaint alleging that he is working as Head of the H.R. Department. On 29.5.2018 while he was in the Branch he received a threatening message to his mobile and he did not consider the said message very seriously. Again at about 1.18 p.m. he received one more message and again he did not consider very seriously. He further stated that at about 3.03 p.m. he received one more message from the same number and he read all the messages. Then he came to know that they have demanded an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- from the Managing Director Sri.Narayan Kamath and stated that if the said amount was not paid, there was thereat to his life and they would damage their hotel. He decided to bring the same to the knowledge of the Managing Director. Again at about 6.24 p.m. he received a threatening call from the said number stating that they had not taken the matter seriously and further informed that they had slightly damaged the Kunigal Branch and they have given a signal to them in that context. It is further alleged that on 27.5.2018 at about 2.45 p.m. in the gents toilet of Kunigal branch near the exhaust fan there was a blast from the spray bottle of Hit Company meant to kill cockroaches and thereby destruction was committed to the floor of the toilet and some damage has been caused. On the basis of the complaint a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused that already charge sheet has been filed after investigation. There is no overt acts and allegations have been made as against the petitioner/accused. The only allegation has been made as against accused Nos.1 and 3. In the charge sheet material also it is stated that it is accused Nos.1 and 3 who have kept the bomb in the toilet. The only allegation which has been made as against the petitioner/accused No.2 is that he has given a threatening call to the complainant and nothing more than that. He further submitted that there is a delay in filing the complaint. No explanation has been given. The alleged offence are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. He is ready to abide by the conditions imposed by this Court and ready to offer the sureties. On these grounds he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that petitioner/accused No.2 has conspired with accused Nos.1 and 3 and he has given threatening message demanding Rs.50,00,000/-. If the said amount is not given, the life of the Managing Director and building is under threat. He further submitted that the two mobile phones have been seized at the instance of accused No.2 which have been used for giving the threatening calls. He further submitted that if the petitioner/accused is enlarged on bail, again he will indulged in similar type of criminal activities and he may abscond. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
7. On close reading of the charge sheet material, the main allegations which have been made is as against the petitioner/accused Nos.1 and 3. Insofar as petitioner/accused No.2 is concerned, the only allegation which has been made is that he has given the threatening message and threatening call to the complainant and there are no other serious offences as against the petitioner/accused No.2. Already charge sheet has been filed and the custodial interrogation is not necessary. Under the said facts and circumstances, I feel that if by imposing some stringent conditions, if the petitioner/accused is ordered to be released on bail, it is going to meet the ends of justice.
8. In the light of the discussions held by me above, the petition is allowed and petitioner/accused No.2 is ordered to be released on bail in Crime No.106/2018 of Amruthur police station for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 506, 427 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act, subject to the following conditions:
i) The petitioner 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.
ii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
iii) He shall mark his attendance in the jurisdictional police on 1st of every month between 10.00 A.M. and 5.00 P.M. till the trial is concluded.
iv) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission of the Court.
v) He shall not indulged in similar type of criminal activities.
vi) If he involves in criminal activities, the trial Court is at liberty to cancel the bail.
Sd/- JUDGE *AP/-