IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8265/2018 Between:
Moon Mizar, S/o Siba Mizar, Aged about 27 years, Residing at C/o Muni Reddy Building, Chichirukaranahalli Village, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.
Permanently residing at Ambari Fatasil, Kamrup Metro, Assam – 781 025. ...Petitioner (By Sri.G.R. Sheshadri, Advocate) And:
State of Karnataka, By Sarjapura Police Station, Anekal Taluk – 562 125.
Represented by Special Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore – 560 001. ...Respondent (By Smt. Namitha Mahesh B.G. HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439(1)(B) of the Cr.P.C. praying to relax one of the bail condition by setting aside the order of paying cash security of Rs.75,000/- imposed by the Hon’ble III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural sits at Anekal in S.C.No.5054/2017 while allowing bail.
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 under Section 439 (1)(B) of Cr.P.C. praying to relax the bail condition imposed by the trial court by order dated 23.10.2017 .
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The gist of the case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/accused and CW1-complainant are working together in a factory and they were living together since three years. It is submitted that recently CW1-complainant started to live separately along with CW.3. Thus the accused developed grudge against the complainant and in that light, on 13.4.2017 took the complainant along with him by stating that he will provide him a big cylinder and when they were going near Mariamma temple, CW1-complainant advised the accused/petitioner not to consume alcohol and spoil his life. At that time, the accused become angry and all of a sudden took a knife and stabbed over neck, stomach and other parts of the body of the complainant and tried to do away with his life. On the basis of the said complaint, a case was registered.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused that by order dated 23.10.2017, the court below has released the accused-petitioner and while releasing him on bail, it has imposed a condition to pay a sum of Rs.75,000/- as cash security.
As the petitioner being a poor person working as a daily wager for meager wages, hence, it is very difficult for him to pay cash security. He is ready to abide by the other conditions imposed by the trial court. Hence, prays for relaxing the cash security condition imposed by the trial court.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP fairly submitted that as per the dictum of the Hon’ble Apex Court insisting cash security is deprecated and the condition which has been imposed by the trial court is not in accordance with law.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the order passed by the trial court. The trial court after considering the facts and material has released the accused/petitioner on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for the likesum and it has further imposed a condition to furnish cash security of Rs.75,000/- with other conditions. It is submitted by the learned High Court Government Pleader that it is not fair on the part of the trial court to insist cash security while releasing the accused on bail. This proposition of law has been laid down by the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Moti Ram and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1978 Supreme Court, 1594. The Hon’ble Apex Court in para No.17 , it has been held as under:
17. The Encyclopedia Britannica brings out the same point even in more affluent societies:
“bail, procedure by which a judge or magistrate sets at liberty one who has been arrested or imprisoned, upon receipt of security to ensure the released prisoner’s later appearance in court for further proceedings……… Failure to consider financial ability has generated much controversy in recent years, for bail requirements may discriminate against poor people and certain minority groups who are thus deprived of an equal opportunity to secure their freedom pending trial. Some courts now give special consideration to indigent accused persons who, because of their community standing and past history, are considered likely to appear in court.”(4) “We should suggest that the Magistrate must always bear in mind that monetary bail is not a necessary element of the criminal process and even if risk of monetary loss is a deterrent against fleeing from justice, it is not the only deterrent and there are other factors which are sufficient deterrents against flight. The Magistrate must abandon the antiquated concept under which pre-trial release could be ordered only against monetary bail. That concept is out-dated and experience has shown that it has done more harm than good. The new insight into the subject of pre-trial release which has now been developed in socially advanced countries and particularly the United States should now inform the decisions of the Magistrates in regard to pre-trial release. Every other feasible method of pre-trial release should be exhausted before resorting to monetary bail. The practice which is now being followed in the United States is that the accused should ordinarily be released on order to appear or on his own recognizance unless it is shown that there is substantial risk of non-appearance or there are circumstances justifying imposition of conditions on release…… If a Magistrate is satisfied after making an enquiry into the condition and background of the accused that the accused has his roots in the community and is not likely to abscond, he can safely release the accused on order to appear or on his own recognizance……”(5) 7. Keeping in view the above said facts and circumstances, I feel that to the extent of imposing a cash security to the tune of Rs.75,000/- is not in accordance with law, the same requires to be relaxed.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the condition imposed by the trial court with regard to insisting to furnish cash security of Rs.75,000/- is relaxed and the other conditions imposed by the trial court remain undisturbed.
Sd/- JUDGE Psg*