IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6397 OF 2017 BETWEEN:-
RAVI S/O LATE BABANNA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/A SURANIGE TANDYA, SURANIGE VILLAGE, SHIRAHATTI TALUK, GADAG DISTRICT-582101. ... PETITIONER (By Sri: HARISH PRABHU S, ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BANAKAL POLICE REPRESENTED BY S.P.P HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU -560001. ... RESPONDENT (By Sri: K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN S.C.NO.15/2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU AND CRIME NO.96/2016 OF BANAKAL POLICE STATION, CHIKKAMAGALURU, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 144, 148, 448, 302, 324 R/W 149 OF IPC;
THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU HAS DISMISSED THE BAIL APPLICATION ON 12.6.2017 IN S.C.NO.15/2017.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent. Learned HCGP has not filed any statement of objections opposing the petition. Perused the charge sheet copy.
2. The petitioner alongwith five others are charge sheeted under sections 143, 144, 148, 448, 302 r/w section 149 Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.4. The allegation is that earlier to the incident, the deceased had abused accused No.1 and as a sequel to this incident, on 24.10.2016, at about 9.00p.m., all the accused persons barged into the house of the deceased and picked up quarrel with the deceased. Accused No.1 assaulted the deceased with hands, accused No.2 and accused No.5 assaulted the deceased with clubs, accused No.3 assaulted him with ‘Sable’ and when the deceased fell down, accused Nos.4 and 6 kicked and assaulted him with hands.
3. The petitioner is in custody since 25.10.2016. Accused Nos.5 and 6 are already enlarged on bail by this Court by order dated 13.10.2017 in Crl.P.No.7335/2017. The allegations leveled against the petitioner herein are at par with accused Nos.5 and 6. Hence, on parity, the petitioner is entitled for bail. That apart, having regard to the overt acts attributed to the petitioner and the investigation having already concluded, I do not find any reason to extend the custody of the petitioner.
4. Hence, the following order:-
Criminal petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions:-
a. The petitioner shall furnish a bond for Rs.1.00 lakh(Rupees One lakh only) with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;
b. The petitioner shall not threaten or allure the prosecution witnesses in any manner;
c. The petitioner shall appear before the court as and when required;
d. The petitioner shall not indulge in similar offences.
Sd/- JUDGE *mn/-