IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8731/2017 BETWEEN:
Jagadish S/o Late Somashekar Aged about 22 years R/at No.128, 3rd Main, 2nd Cross Near St. Anns School Kamalanagara Bangalore-560 079. ... PETITIONER (By Sri Mohan Kumara D, Adv.) AND:
State by Basaveshwaranagar Police Station Represented by the State Public Prosecutor High Court Complex Bangalore-560 001. ...RESPONDENT (By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.19/2014 (Spl.C.C.No.152/2014) of Basaveshwara Nagar P.S., Bengaluru, for the offences P/U/Ss 366(A) and 376 of IPC and Sections 3, 4, 7 and 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER This petition is filed by the accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail, to direct the respondent-police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC and under Sections 3, 4, 7 and 8 of POCSO Act registered in respondent police station Crime No.19/2014 now pending in Spl. CC.No.152/2014.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments submitted that earlier petitioner had applied for bail before the learned Sessions Judge at Bengaluru and the learned Sessions Judge after considering the entire merits of the case allowed the petition by order dated 4.8.2014 and granted regular bail to the petitioner herein imposing certain conditions. He has also produced the copy of the said bail order. He has submitted that subsequently the petitioner remained absent for some adjourned dates to appear before the concerned Court, as such, NBW is issued. Hence, he sought for anticipatory bail.
4. Per-contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposed the petition contending that petitioner has not followed the conditions of bail order and remained absent. Hence, he is not entitled to be granted with anticipatory bail.
5. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and also the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Bengaluru dated 4.8.2014 wherein the merits of the case were considered by the said Court and ultimately, bail was granted to the petitioner herein. In view of these circumstances and the grounds urged in the bail petition, I feel one more opportunity is to be given to the petitioner-accused.
6. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent-Police are directed to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC and under Sections 3, 4, 7 and 8 of POCSO Act registered in respondent police station Crime No.19/2014 now pending in Spl. CC.No.152/2014, subject to the following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and shall furnish one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the arresting authority.
ii. Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii. Petitioner shall make himself available before the Investigating Officer for interrogation, as and when called for and to co-operate with the further investigation.
iv. Petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court within 30 days from the date of this order and to execute the personal bond and the surety bond.
Sd/- JUDGE bkp