IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION No.9208 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
S.K.World Company, No.41, HB, 2nd Stage, Venkateshapuram, Bengaluru, Rep. by its Proprietor Suhail Khan, S/o.Late Mohammed Younus, Aged 59 years, R/at No.KG41, 1st Floor, HBR Road, 2nd Stage, Nagawara Main Road, K.G.Halli, Bangalore North, Arabic College, Bengaluru. ... Petitioner (By Sri Moyeenulla Abbasi, Advocate) AND:
1. Jagadish, S/o.Thangavelu, Aged 31 years, R/at Myraru House, Odilnala Village, Belthangady Taluk.
2. State of Karnataka, By Belthangady Police Station, State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bengaluru. ...Respondents (By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP for R2) This criminal petition is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.391/2015 (C.c.No.305/2017) of Belthangadi Police Station, Dakshina Kannada District for the offences punishable under Sections 205, 206 and 420 of IPC and etc.
This criminal petition, coming on for orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER This is the petition filed by petitioner accused under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail and to direct the respondent Police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of the arrest of the petitioner for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 205, 206 and 420 registered in respondent Police Station in Crime No.391/2015 now pending in C.C.No.305/2017.
2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner so also learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent State.
3. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials produced in the case.
4. Looking to the materials, it is seen that the respondent No.1 filed a private complaint before the J.M.F.C. Court under Section 200 Cr.P.C. It is submitted that the said complaint was referred to the Police for investigation and ‘B’ report. After investigation, the Police have filed the ‘B’ summary report which has been opposed by the complainant by filing objection statement. Thereafterwards, the learned Magistrate took cognizance. It is the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even looking to the allegations made in the private complaint, no prima-facie case is made out as against the petitioner of his involvement in committing the alleged offences. He submitted that because of that reason, only Police, after investigation, filed the ‘B’ summary report. He submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any reasonable conditions to be imposed by the Court. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, the petitioner can be admitted to anticipatory bail.
5. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondent No.2 Police are hereby directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 205, 206 and 420 registered in respondent Police Station in Crime No.391/2015 now pending in C.C.No.305/2017, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner accused shall have to execute personal bond for Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting authority.
(ii) He shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
(iii) He has to mark his attendance before the concerned Police Station once in a month preferably on Sunday in between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. till the completion of investigation and he has to cooperate with the investigation agency for further investigation so also for interrogation.
(iv) He has to appear before the concerned Court and to execute the personal bond so also the surety bond within 30 days from the date of this order.
Sd/- JUDGE Cm/-