IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA CRL.P. NO.8292/2019 BETWEEN IMRAN KHAN S/O AHMED KHAN AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS TIPPUNAGAR 5TH CROSS SHIVAMOGGA – 577 205 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. RANGANATH REDDY R, ADVOCATE) AND STATE BY THUNGANAGAR POLICE STATION SHIVAMOGGA REP. BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU – 560 001 … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HONNAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.553/2018 OF TUNGA NAGAR POLICE STATION, SHIVAMOGGA, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/Ss.143, 144, 147, 148, 506, 307, 395, 364-A, 342, 450, 120-B R/W SEC.149 OF IPC AND SECs.3 &, 25(1) ARMS ACT 1959 AND SEC.3 OF KCOCA ACT, 2000.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent - State. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner is cited as accused No.9 in Crime No.553/2018 on the file of respondent – Police for the offences under Sections 144, 147, 148, 506, 307, 395, 364-A, 342, 450, 120B read with Section 149 of IPC and under Sections 3 & 25(1) of the Arms Act, 1959 and Section 3 of Karnataka Control of Organized Crimes Act, 2000 (‘KCOCA’ for brevity).
3. The entire charge sheet papers are produced before the court. On the basis of the charge sheet, a Special Case in No.50/2019 has been registered.
4. The brief facts of the case are that:
On 05.07.2018 at about 6.20 p.m., accused No.9 along with his four other counterparts came in Verna car bearing registration No.KA-01/MD-3928, entered the Granite premises of the complainant and accused No.1 shown a pistol and four other accused persons were possessed with knife, long choppers, etc. and threatened the complainant to go along with them. Accordingly, they took him to Gadigoppa Aluru Anupinakatte Layout at about 6.45 p.m. The said accused persons have threatened the complainant with dire consequence with the above deadly weapons and demanded an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- from the complainant, for which the complainant telephoned to his brother-in-law and informed him that, his friend is coming to the complainant’s house and to pay him the amount. Accordingly, accused No.1 along with his counterparts reached the house of the complainant and threatened the wife, mother-in-law and children of the complainant and told them that he has kidnapped the complainant and demanded Rs.5.00 Crores ransom from the family members and came back to the complainant and pushed the complainant inside the Innova car and other three persons came in Duster car, which shows that totally eight persons were gathered in connection with the said case and thereafter one person by name Ahmed, who was in the complainant’s house, has brought an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs) and handed over the said amount to the counterparts of accused No.1, who came in Duster car near Kashipura Railway Gate.
5. On these allegations, initially a case has been registered and the Police have investigated the matter. During the course of investigation, they also found that accused No.9 (petitioner herein) was also in the said group of the accused persons.
6. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that, the invocation of KCOCA is unwarranted, as he has been falsely implicated in this case. Subsequently on the basis of the voluntary statement of other accused persons and as far as the witnesses are concerned, they are subsequently and belatedly examined by the Police. The learned counsel further submitted that, this is the only case pending against the petitioner (A9).
7. On careful perusal of the entire charge sheet papers, of course, in the first information report ie., at the initial stage, the presence and participation of this petitioner (A9) was not spoken to. Further added to that, subsequently and belatedly, as rightly contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the witnesses have been examined and some of the witnesses, who actually seen the incident, have stated about the participation of the petitioner herein. The name of the petitioner was surfaced only during the course of investigation and at the time of filing of the charge sheet, his name was incorporated. Though the offences are seriously punishable particularly under the provisions of KCOCA, Arms Act and Section 395 of IPC, there is a doubt about the participation of this petitioner (A9), when his name does not find a place in the FIR. Even subsequently, as could be seen from the complaint, only eight persons were shown to have been involved in the incident in question. Therefore, the aspect that, ‘when actually this petitioner (A9) has joined the other accused persons in this case, is the question to be proved during the course of full-dressed trial.
8. So far as the offences under the provisions of KCOCA is concerned, as rightly contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner (A9), it is very difficult at this stage to draw an inference that, this petitioner (A9) was a syndicate member earlier also along with other accused persons and they have been committing such offences and the charge sheets were filed against some of the accused persons, which also entangles the petitioner in order to invoke the said KCOCA.
9. Admittedly, there is no other case pending against the present petitioner (A9) and no charge sheets have been filed against him. Therefore, when the invocation of the KCOCA is doubtful, it may not be proper on the part of this Court to reject the bail petition, particularly when the KCOCA is invoked against this petitioner. Therefore, during the course of full- dressed trial, if it is established that, the petitioner was also a syndicate member and even earlier also he was participated in any crimes, though his name does not find in any other charge sheet, but he was present with the other accused persons, who were involved in this case, in such an eventuality, the court can definitely take into consideration of the same at the time of recording of the evidence and if it is established, the Court can alter the charges and even it can convict the accused for the offence under the KCOCA also at the time of pronouncing the judgment, on the basis of the evidence on record.
10. Looking to the above said facts and circumstances, the participation of petitioner (A9) has to be established beyond reasonable doubt during the course of full-dressed trial.
11. Under the above said circumstances, in my opinion, with stringent conditions, the petitioner (A9) is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the following:
ORDER The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner (A9)-Imran Khan shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.553/2018 of Tunga Nagar Police Station, Shivamogga, pending in Special CC.No.50/2019 on the file of Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bangalore, for the aforesaid offences, 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 solvent sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses;
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine reason;
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the Court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
KGR* Sd/-
JUDGE