IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION No.7996/2019 BETWEEN:
SACHIN @ SACHIN SUDHAGAR K.
S/O KUMARESAN, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.52, SAW MILL LINE, MARIKUPPAM, K.G.F. PIN – 563 119.
AND ALSO R/AT HOUSE NO.52, SAW MILL LINE, MARIKUPPAM, K.G.F. BANGAR PET, MARIKUPPAM, KOLAR, PIN – 563 119. … PETITIONER (BY SRI LAKSHMI KANTH .K., ADVOCTE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MARIKUPPAM POLICE STATION, K.G.F, REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILIDNG, BANGALORE – 560 001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI ROHITH B.J, HCGP.) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.22/2019 OF MARIKUPPAM POLICE STATION, K.G.F FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 143,144,147,148,323,324,341,504,506,307 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State. Perused the records.
2. Petitioner is accused No.6 in Crime No.22/2019 registered by the respondent – Police for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 323, 324, 341, 504, 506, 307 read with Section 149 IPC.
3. Brief facts of the case are that, a person by name Chandrakantha has lodged a complaint making allegation that on 14.09.2019 at about 9.45 p.m., her son by name Rahul after having dinner left the house to go to a shop and therafter, she heard the voice of her son screaming for help. In that context, the complainant said that they all went to the particular spot and when they reached near the house of one Mani, they observed accused Nos.1 to 3 holding deadly weapons were assaulting the injured and other persons who were present on the spot were also assaulting the injured. Thereafter, accused No.1 – Karthik and accused No.2 - Dileep Kumar were arrested and their voluntary statement was recorded by the police. Their statement reveals that this petitioner was also along with them, but he never used any weapon. He actually assaulted with his hands and kicked the injured with his legs.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner produced a document i.e., discharge summary certificate issued by BMJ Hospital which discloses that injured was admitted to the Hospital on 15.09.2019 and discharged on 25.09.2019. In the FIR, main allegations are made against accused Nos.1, 2 and 3, who were actually holding the deadly weapons and assaulted the injured. Even in the statement of the accused, the involvement of this petitioner is only with regard to assaulting of injured with his hands and kicked him with his legs.
5. Under the above said facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, petitioner has made out a ground, at this stage, for grant of bail with stringent conditions, so as to enable the police to investigate further and complete the investigation. Hence, the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.22/2019 registered by Marikuppam Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 323, 324, 341, 504, 506, 307 read with Section 149 IPC, subject to the following conditions:-
i) The petitioner shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer.
ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation, and he shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.
iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Investigating Officer without prior permission, till the charge sheet is filed or for a period of three months whichever is earlier.
v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a week i.e., on every Sunday between 10.00 am and 5.00 pm., before the Investigating Officer for a period of two months or till the charge sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.
Sd/-
JUDGE PKS