Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Prathap vs Rashekara

High Court Of Karnataka|23 January, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9675/2018 BETWEEN :
Prathap S/o Gangadharaiah Aged about 23 years R/at Kumbaiahanapalya Village Huliyurdurga Hobli, Kunigal Taluk Tumakuru District-572 123.
(By Sri K.A. Chandrashekara, Advocate) AND :
The State of Karnataka … Petitioner by the Police of Huliyurdurga Police Station Kunigal Taluk, Tumakuru District-572 123 Represented by State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Bengaluru-560 001.
… Respondent (By Sri K.P. Yoganna, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.174/2018 of Huliyurdurga Police Station, Tumkur District for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 397 of Indian Penal Code.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:-
O R D E R The present petition is filed by accused No.4 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to release him on bail in Crime No.174/2018 of Huliyurdurga Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 397 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent- State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that on 31.8.2018 at about 9.30 p.m., when the complainant was sitting in the car bearing Regn.No.MH-20-EE-9733, the petitioner herein and other accused persons came there, dragged the complainant outside the car and robbed gold chain, rudrakshi chain, finger ring and other articles. On the basis of the compliant, a case has been registered.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that initially the complaint was filed against unknown persons and the petitioner-accused No.4 has been implicated in the case on the basis of the voluntary statement stated to have been made by accused No.1. There are no specific overt acts as against the petitioner and no recovery has been made at the instance of the petitioner. Investigation has already been completed and the charge sheet has been filed and therefore the petitioner is not required for the purpose of further investigation or interrogation. He further submitted that in other crime, i.e., Crime No.300/2018 of Tilaknagar Police Station, petitioner has been released on bail. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court and to ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, the learned HCGP vehemently argued and submitted that during the course of investigation, fact revealed that it is accused Nos.1 and 4 who have threatened the complainant and have robbed gold chain, rudrakshi chain and finger ring and other articles. He further submitted that the petitioner was also a member of the said group and he has been involved in many more cases. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and I have also perused the records.
7. It is not in dispute that earlier accused Nos.3 and 5 approached this Court and this Court by the order dated 17.12.2018 in Criminal Petition No.8169/2018 connected with Criminal Petition No.8261/2018 has released them on bail by imposing certain conditions. In the instant case, there is no allegation that any robbed articles have been recovered at the instance of the petitioner. The only allegation as against the petitioner- accused No.4 is that he was also present at the time of the alleged incident and he along with the other accused threatened the complainant and robbed gold chain, finger ring and other articles. When already accused Nos.3 and 5 have been released on bail by this Court, on the ground of parity, the petitioner herein is also entitled to be released on bail by imposing certain conditions.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed and accused No.4-petitioner herein is enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions:-
i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
ii) He shall appear before the trial Court throughout the trial.
iii) He shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
iv) He shall mark his attendance for one year once in 15 days in between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m.
Sd/- JUDGE *ck/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Prathap vs Rashekara

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
23 January, 2019
Judges
  • B A Patil