IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE H B PRABHAKARA SASTRY CRIMINAL PETITION No.2024/2019 BETWEEN:
1 SATHISH @ PAKEERA S/O. LATE SHIVANANJU AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/O. 4TH CROSS, MARIGOWDA EXTENSION, MANDYA CITY PIN – 571 401 2 RITHIK @ HARSHA S/O. MALLIK AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS R/AT 9TH CROSS, GANDHI NAGARA MANDYA CITY PIN – 571 401 3 CHETHANA @ CHETHU S/O. MANJUNATHA L.N., AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/O. 2ND CROSS, KHB COLONY, KUVEMPUNAGARA HOUSING BOARD MANDYA CITY PIN – 571 401 4 NAGESHA @ PRUTHVI @ BUDABUDAKE S/O. SHIVALINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/O. NEW EXTENSION KYATHUMGERE MANDYA CITY PIN – 571 401 (BY SRI. K. LAKSHMIKANTH, ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BASARALU POLICE STATION REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE – 01 (BY SRI. CHANDRAMOULI H.S., SPP-I) ... PETITIONERS …RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.439 OF CR.PC. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN CR. NO.3/2019 OF BASARALU POLICE STATION, MANDYA, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 395 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioners are Accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 in Respondent-Basaralu Police Station in Crime No.3/2019 for the offence punishable under Section 395 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. The summary of the allegations made against the accused in the FIR is that on the late night of 10.01.2019 i.e., at about 0030 hours on 11.01.2019, the accused who were five in number restrained the complainant on a public road and showing him a knife, threatening him with dire consequences, robbed cash of `12,000, Bank ATM card and cell phone.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, in his arguments, submitted that the accused have been falsely implicated. The Police have implicated the accused in several similar cases falsely and only to fulfill their statistical purposes. As such, even though accused have been totally innocent, still the Police having no evidence, have falsely implicated them in several cases. He further submits that investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed and as such continuation of accused in judicial custody is unnecessary.
4. Per contra, learned Special Public Prosecutor, in his arguments, submitted that all the accused including present petitioners are all habitual offenders and were involved in similar activities earlier also. He further apprehends that in case they are enlarged on bail, there is also possibility of they repeating similar offence.
5. A reading of the complaint, at this stage, prima facie, would go to show that prior to the incident, the complainant had consumed vodka and beer along with the accused who were said to have been waiting on the public road with their Nano car and thereafter proceeded to their destination in their respective cars. It is at that stage, accused who were sitting in their car, is said to have overtaken the car of the complainant and restrained him on public road. They are alleged to have committed dacioty by robbing him of valuables.
6. As could be gathered at this stage, as at the time of incident, the accused were unknown persons to the complainant and identity of the alleged accused were also not known to the complainant. It is only the accused who are said to have disclosed their identity before the complainant which the complainant believed and acted upon. Therefore, identity of the accused is yet to be ascertained during the course of the trial. Further, the investigation is admittedly stated to be completed. It is not the case of the prosecution that for investigation purposes, the petitioners are required to be continued in judicial custody. The other apprehension of the prosecution that the petitioners may flee from justice in case of their enlargement on bail can be checked by imposing reasonable restrictions. As such, petitioners can be enlarged on bail, however, with reasonable restrictions. Accordingly, I proceed to pass following:
ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioners be enlarged on bail in Crime No.3 of 2019 of Basaluru Police Station, Mandya District, for the offence punishable U/S 395 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
i) That the petitioners shall execute personal bond of `60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand only) each with two solvent sureties, with proof of their address and to the satisfaction of the enlarging Court.
No single surety shall stand as surety for more than two accused.
ii) The petitioners to give in writing about the change in their address, if any, to the Investigating Officer as and when such change occurs and obtain acknowledgement in that regard.
iii) They shall appear before the Court on all the dates of hearing.
iv) They shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses and documents.
Sd/- JUDGE AN/-