IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9229/2018 BETWEEN:
SATHISH S/O RAMU AGED 40 YEARS, R/AT AKKATHEPORAMBAIL ANKANAGAR, NADARATHNA THRISHURA DISTRICT KERALA STATE-620680 … PETITIONER [BY SRI. S. RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE] AND:
STATE REP. BY POLICE SUB INSPECTOR, CHANNAPATNA RURAL POLICE STATION, REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE-560 001 … RESPONDENT [BY SRI. K.P. YOGANNA, HCGP] * * * THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.PC., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.91/2009 OF CHANNAPATNA RURAL POLICE STATION, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT 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 present petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail in Crime No.91/2009 of Channapatna Rural Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 395 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.3 and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that on 30.03.2009 at about 2 pm, the accused persons stopped the Innova car bearing registration No.KL-56-7126 and surrounded the car with rods, broke the glasses of the car into pieces and assaulted them by hands and rods and robbed Rs.4 lakhs cash, two Nokia mobiles and Innova car. It is further stated that after they fled away, the case was registered in the aforesaid crime.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that Accused No.7 has been tried in S.C. No.1/2014 and was acquitted by order dated 19.12.2018. He further submitted that the present Accused is native of Kerala and he has not been served with notice and he was not aware of the fact that the case is pending as against him. He further submitted that there is no prima facie material to connect the accused to the alleged crime. He further submitted that he is ready to give local sureties and ready to appear on all dates of hearing. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that alleged incident has taken place on 30.03.2009 and thereafter the accused was absconding and only after non bailable warrant he has been apprehended and has been detained in the jail. If he is released on bail, he may abscond and may not be available for trial. It is further submitted that the Accused Nos. 1 and 2 who have already been granted bail are absconding and they were not traced. He prays to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the contents of the complaint and submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the other materials placed on record.
7. On close scrutiny of the records, it is evident that the alleged incident has taken place on 30.03.2009. There are no records to show that notice has been served on the Accused No.3 and deliberately he has remained absent. Even as could be seen from the records, the Accused No.7 has been tried in S.C. No.1/2014 and he has been acquitted by order dated 19.12.2018. As could be seen from the charge sheet materials, no incriminating evidence is forthcoming as against the petitioner-Accused No.3. Under the said facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that by imposing stringent conditions if the accused-petitioner is enlarged on bail, it would meet the ends of justice.
8. In the light of the above discussion, petition is allowed.
9. Petitioner/accused No.3 is enlarged on bail in Crime No.91/2009 of Channapatna Rural Police Station for the offence punishable under section 395 of IPC subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner/accused No.3 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two lakhs only) with two local sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.
3. He shall not indulge himself in any other criminal activity during the trial.
4. He shall attend the trial Court regularly till the completion of the trial.
5. He shall mark his attendance to the local Police Station of his residence once in 15 days between 10.00 a.m., to 5.00 p.m., till the trial is completed.
6. A copy of this order be communicated to the jurisdictional Police Station where the accused resides to take his attendance.
Sd/- JUDGE AN/-