IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No. 1829/2019 Between:
1. Shakeel S/o. Akbar, Aged about 28 years, R/at No.3, Apartment 9th Block, II Floor, Amrutha Badavane, Mysuru, Mysuru District 574 222.
2. Altaf S/o. Khaleem, Aged about 25 years, R/at No.8, Apartment 8th Block, Ground Floor, Amrutha Badavane, Mysuru, Mysuru District 574 222. (By Sri. Lethif B, Advocate) And:
The State of Karnataka By Udayagiri Police Station, Mysuru District, Rep. by SPP High Court Building, Bangalore 560 001.
(By Sri. K. P. Yoganna, HCGP) … Petitioners …Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., praying to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent Police for the offence punishable under Section 394 of IPC in Crime No.108/2016 of Udayagiri Police Station, Mysuru District, pending on the file of II Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) & JMFC, Mysuru.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER Petitioners are seeking to be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest with respect to the proceedings in Crime No.108/2016 for the offence punishable under Section 394 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that a complaint was filed by one Girish. M on 04.05.2016 alleging that the complainant was working in Hindustan Unilever Limited as a salesman for the last five months. It is alleged that on 03.05.2016 at about 9.30 a.m., complainant had left his house to take orders and when he had reached Fathima Stores at about 1.30 p.m., 2 unknown persons on a motorcycle waylaid him and snatched away money and caused injuries by assaulting him. Complaint was lodged, FIR is registered and investigation is in progress.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners were in custody relating to the proceedings in Crime No.333/2017 initiated by Udayagiri Police Station. It is further stated that the present crime against the petitioners has been sought to be made out on the basis of the alleged voluntary statement of the accused made before the police in Crime No. 333/2017. It is further contended that the veracity of such statement is still to be established. It is submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners would not arise in the present case as they have been interrogated and information regarding alleged commission of offence which is the subject matter of the present proceedings has already been furnished. However, it is made clear that even if the case of the prosecution were to be true, as custodial interrogation of the petitioners is complete, no case is made out for the custodial interrogation in the present matter.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader contends that for the purpose of Test Identification Parade as well as for the purpose of recovery, detention of the petitioners is required.
5. It is to be noted that custodial interrogation for all practical purposes is complete as the police have subjected the petitioners for custodial interrogation with respect to the proceedings in Crime No.333/2017 wherein it is alleged that information regarding commission of present offence which is the subject matter of proceedings in Crime No.108/2016 has been revealed. However, it is the settled legal position that in appropriate cases taking note of the law laid down in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others [2010 (8) SCC 353] for the purpose of recovery, petitioners can either deemed to be in custody or may be taken into custody for the limited purpose of recovery. Thus for the limited purpose of recovery, the petitioners can be taken into custody. Insofar as Test Identification Parade is concerned, petitioners are directed to co-operate with the investigating Authorities. In light of the requirement of the petitioners for Test Identification Parade appropriate conditions are imposed.
6. Accordingly, the bail petition filed by the petitioners under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and the petitioners are enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.108/2016 for the offence punishable under Section 394 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners shall appear in person before the II Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC, Mysuru, in connection with Crime No.108/2016 within 15 days from the date of release of the order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of `1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Court.
(ii) The petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigating Authorities for the purpose of Test Identification Parade to be conducted.
(iii) The petitioners shall surrender before the concerned Station House Officer for a brief period to facilitate discovery to be made under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, if such circumstances arise in the course of investigation.
(iv) The petitioners shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way, any witness.
(v) The petitioners shall physically mark their attendance before the concerned Station House Officer once in a week between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the final report.
(vi) In the event of change of address, the petitioners to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(vii) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioners, shall result in cancellation of bail.
Any observation made herein shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Copy of this order to be furnished by the petitioners to the Investigating Officer within 15 days from the date of release of this order.
Sd/- JUDGE VP