IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRL. P. NO.7720/2017 BETWEEN MANOJ @ ARUN AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, S/O MUNISWAMY, R/AT RAJENDRANAGAR, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560034. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJESH RAO K, ADV.) AND THE STATE BY, RAMAMURTHY NAGARA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY, GOVT. PLEADER, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.NAGESHWARAPPA, ADV.) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.73/2012 OF RAMAMURTHY NAGAR POLICE STATION AND IN S.C.NO.1358/2016 PENDING ON THE FILE OF LI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 302,392 AND 120(B) R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ‘ORDERS’, THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This is the petition by the petitioner-Accused No.5 filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to release him on bail for the alleged offences punishable under Section 392 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code registered in Crime No.73/2012 and after investigation, the charge sheet is also came to be filed for the offences punishable under Section 120 (b) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code also in addition to the existing offences.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.5 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
3. Learned counsel made a submission that the petitioner has been already granted bail, but because of the difficulty pleaded in the petition, he has not attended the court and remained absent. Hence, non bailable warrant was issued and again he was taken to custody.
Learned Counsel submitted that the absence of the petitioner is neither intentional nor deliberate but, it is because of the reasons mentioned in the bail petition. Hence, he submitted to allow the petition by imposing reasonable conditions.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader opposed the petition submitting that looking to the conduct of the petitioner he remained absent and violated the conditions of the bail order, therefore he is not entitled to the bail.
5. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, Complaint and other materials as submitted by both the sides.
6. The earlier bail petition of the petitioner was considered on merits and he was granted bail by the order of the court. But because of the difficulty pleaded in the present bail petition as he has not appeared before the concerned court, again he was taken to custody. He has undertaken in this bail petition that he will be regular before the court. Hence, one more opportunity is to be given to the present petitioner-accused No.5.
Hence, the petition is allowed. The petitioner No.5 is ordered to be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:
i) Petitioner has to execute a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- [Rupees One Lakh only] and has to furnish one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
ii) Petitioner shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
iii) Petitioner has to appear before the concerned Court regularly.
CT-HR Chs* Sd/- JUDGE