IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15th DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.734 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
R.S. Sathyanarayana Raj @ Motte Sathish S/o Venkatarama Raj Aged about 40 years R/at Channel Melbaga Sulebylu Shivamogga – 577 201. …Petitioner (By Sri. Sateeshchandra K.V, Advocate) AND:
The State by Sub-Inspector of Police Thungara Police Station Shivamogga Rep. by State Public Prosecutor High Court Complex Bengaluru – 560 001. …Respondent (By Sri. M. Diwakar Maddur, HCGP) This petition is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in event of his arrest in Cr.No.853/2018 of Tunga Nagar Police Station, Shivamogga for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 302, 504, 506 and 115 r/w Section 149 of IPC and etc.
This petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER This petition has been filed by the petitioner - accused No.5 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.853/2018 of Tunga Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 504, 302, 506, 115 read with Section 149 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent -State.
3. Gist of the complaint is that on 23.12.2018 at about 9.15 p.m., mother of complainant called the complainant and informed that her brother-deceased might have scuffled with somebody at Shivamogga and asked her to enquire about him. Immediately, complainant called Gabast i.e., the friend of deceased, he by crying informed that when he himself, Karthik, Deeput @ Dinga and deceased were sitting by the side of kachcha road in an open space near Harige at about 8.30 p.m. by drinking alcohol, Ambu @ Anil, Praveena, Darshan, Chikkal Ramesh and others came to the spot by holding Sickle and Long and assaulted the deceased on his head and chest by stating that even though they have told not to visit Shivamogga, he is coming to Shivamogga. When friends of deceased tried to rescue him, they have threatened their lives and thereafter they left the spot. While going they told that Motte Satisha was responsible for the said incident. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner-Accused No.5 that petitioner-accused No.5 in no way related to the accused persons. He was not present at the time of the alleged incident. Earlier to 2010, there were about 14 cases have been registered against him and he was declared as a rowdy. Thereafter he shifted his residence and contested in the elections and became a member of Panchayat and now he is elected as a Corporator. He further submitted that after 2010, no criminal antecedents are there and no cases have been registered against the petitioner. There is only a rare sentence in the complaint that Motte Sathisha is responsible for the alleged incident as stated by one of the accused. Only on the basis of such statement given by one of the accused, petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.5. Petitioner-accused No.5 is not connected or related to the said offences. He further submitted that petitioner- accused No.5 is ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed on him by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner - accused No.5 on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that a petitioner-
accused No.5 was a rowdy, several cases have been registered in various police station. He further contended that petitioner-accused No.5 is responsible for the alleged incident and offences alleged against petitioner-accused No.5 are serious in nature. If he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and he may not be available for trial and as he is a habitual offender, he may likely to indulged in similar type of criminal activities. On these grounds, prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the contents of the complaint and other materials, submission of learned counsel for the parties and perused the records which has been produced in this behalf.
7. Though as observed by the trial Court, from 1996, there were several cases registered against petitioner- accused No.5. But last case which has been registered was Cr.No.137/2006 and in the said case also petitioner-
accused No.5 has been acquitted. The list of the cases registered against petitioner-accused No.5 has also been made available along with the petition. In most of the cases, petitioner-accused No.5 has been acquitted and no cases are pending against him. Be that as it may, on perusal of records it revealed that petitioner-accused No.5 was not present at the time of alleged incident and four accused persons have assaulted the deceased with deadly weapons. The only allegation which has been made against petitioner-accused No.5 is, he is responsible for the alleged incident. But how, in what manner he is related to the alleged incident is not forthcoming either in the complaint or from any source of records.
8. Keeping in view the said facts and circumstance, this Court is of the view that by imposing some stringent conditions if the petitioner – accused No.5 is enlarged on bail, it is going to meet the ends of justice.
9. In that light, petition is allowed and the petitioner-accused No.5 is enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.853/2018 of Tunga Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 504, 302, 506, 115 read with Section 149 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
1. In the event of his arrest, the Investigating Agency is directed to enlarge him on bail on he being executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Lakh Only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Agency.
2. He should surrender before the Investigation Agency within 15 days from today.
3. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence either directly or indirectly.
4. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission 5. He shall mark his attendance once in 15 days between 10.00 a.m., to 5.00 p.m., before the concerned police station till charge sheet is filed.
Sd/- JUDGE SN