IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8804/2017 BETWEEN:
Sri Chikkamada Aged about 40 years S/o Late Sri Siddaiah R/at Karekoppa Village Virupakshapura Hobli Channapatna Taluk Ramanagara District.
(Presently under Duress) ... PETITIONER (By Sri Saravana S, Adv. a/w Sri Satyanarayana Chalke S, Adv.) AND:
The State of Karnataka Station House Officer Akkuru Police Station Channapatna Rural Circle Channapatna Taluk Ramanagara-571 511.
Represented by the State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Bengaluru-560 001. ...RESPONDENT (By Sri K Nageshwarappa, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.131/2011 (C.C.No.426/2012) of Akkur P.S., Ramanagara District, for the offence P/U/S 307 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER This petition is filed by the accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC registered in respondent – police station Crime No.131/2011.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.1 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his arguments submitted that though he is a relative of the complainant, petitioner was not knowing about the initiation of the criminal proceedings against him. The alleged weapon has been seized and as per the FSL report no blood stains are found on the weapon. Hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioner may be admitted to regular bail.
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposed the petition stating that for a period of nearly six years the petitioner remained absconding. NBW was issued and thereafter, proclamation was also issued. Hence, petitioner is not entitled to be granted with bail.
5. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record.
6. The crime is of the year 2011 and we are in the end of 2017. Nearly for a period of six years petitioner remained absconding. The proclamation came to be issued in the case. Therefore, the conduct of the petitioner is most material to entertain the bail petition. Even if he is released on bail, the possibility of he again absconding and putting hurdles in the progress of the criminal case cannot be ruled out in this case. In view of this, I am of the opinion that it is not a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, petition is hereby rejected.
However, as the matter is of the year 2011, the concerned Sessions Court is hereby directed to take up the matter on priority basis and to dispose of the same as early as possible, but not later than six months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
Registry to intimate accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE bkp