IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA CRL.P. NO. 7482/2019 BETWEEN 1. SARAVAN KUMAR SAHANE @ SARAVANT S/O LATE. RAMACHANDRA SAHANE AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS R/O NEAR BAANNIMAHAKALI TEMPLE HALE HARLAPURA, HARIHARA TOWN DAVANAGERE DISTRICT AND ALSO AT PARASADANAHA VILLAGE SAHAJANAVA TALUK, GORAKHPUR UTTAR PRADESH – 271 303 2. DURUGESH SHRIVATHSAV @ DURGESH KUMAR S/O LAXMI NARAYANA SHRIVATSAV AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS CHATAKANAVA VILLAGE GHUVAD POST, MAKAPURA TALUK GONDA DISTRICT UTTAR PRADESH – 271 303 3. FAREESH KUMAR @ HARISH S/O KESHAVARAM AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS R/O NEAR BANNIMAHANKALI TEMPLE HALE HARLAPURA, HARIHARA TOWN DAVANGERE DISTRICT AND ALSO AT BHAGDAR VILLAGE MANKAPURA TALUK, GONDA DISTRICT UTTAR PRADESH – 271 303 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. JAYA PRAKASH.K.N., ADVOCATE) AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA HARIHARA RURAL POLICE STATION DAVANAGERE DISTRICT REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU – 560 001 … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ROHITH B.J., HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.36/2017 OF HARIHARA RURAL POLICE STATION, DAVANAGERE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/Ss. 302, 201 R/W SEC.120-B OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for the Respondent –State. Perused the records.
2. The petitioners are arraigned as Accused Nos.1, 2 & 4 in SC No.101/2017 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Davangere, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120(B) IPC.
3. In fact, the petitioners were released on bail and subsequently, they remained absent before the Court on several occasions. In spite of the Court magnanimously exempted their presence, they remained absent, which affected the trial. The trial Court in detail considered the entire proceedings with reference to the presence and absence of these accused persons. It is seen that, even when the witnesses were present, the Court could not examine them due to the absence of the accused persons. Therefore, the court has rejected their bail petition, when they surrendered before the Court seeking for recalling of the warrant and as well as for grant of further bail.
4. On careful perusal of the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge it is seen that, the learned Judge in detail culled-out as to on how many hearing dates the accused persons remained absent and how it hampered the trial. The order sheet also discloses that, even after remanding the accused persons to the custody, the accused persons were not produced before the Court. Presently the case is set down for examination of further witnesses viz., CWs. 6, 7, 19, 20, 23, 24 and also 25 to 30.
5. Actually, I am reluctant to grant bail to the petitioners because, they have remained absent before the court on many occasions. But, the learned counsel for the petitioner convinced the court stating that, he would very strictly instruct them to appear before the Court on all further hearing dates without fail unless they are exempted by the Court for any genuine reasons, in order to assist the Court for early disposal of the case and further they should abide by any of the conditions that may be imposed by this Court.
6. Looking to the entire order sheet produced by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is seen that the petitioners absented themselves on several occasions, at the same time, it is also seen that, they were also present on various occasions. It is also seen that, some times, though the witnesses were present, but they are not examined due to the absence of some other accused persons, then also the trial got hampered.
7. Be that as it may. In total, the trial has been hampered at the instance of accused persons. The main object of granting bail is to see that the accused appear before the court and assist the court for early disposal of the case. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that, the accused persons are from Uttar Pradesh and it has become difficult for them to travel from such a long distance on every date of hearing. Learned counsel also submitted that, even he has advised the petitioners/accused persons to stay back at Davangere itself so as to attend the court till completion of the trial.
8. Looking to the above said facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that, if one more opportunity is granted with stringent conditions, no prejudice would be caused to the State. Hence, the following,-
ORDER The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioners (A1, 2 & 4) shall be released on bail in connection with SC No. 101/2017 (Crime No.36/2017 of Harihara Rural Police Station) registered against them for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 & 120(B) of IPC, now pending before the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Davangere, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners shall execute their personal bonds for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
(ii) The petitioners shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioners shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission, till the case registered against them is disposed of.
v) The petitioners shall mark their respective attendance once in a week ie., every Sunday between 10.00 am and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet or for a period of two months, whichever is earlier.
vi) Each of the petitioners shall deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) before the trial Court towards litigation expenses. The said amount is ordered to be forfeited to the State after termination of the proceedings before the trial Court.
If the petitioners remained absent before the trial Court for any two consecutive occasions without intimation to the court, this bail order shall not come to their help and in case, if the petitioners remained absent before the court, the trial Court shall take the petitioners to custody once again and proceed with the trial.
KGR* Sd/-
JUDGE