IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.258 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
Sri Girish @ Giri S/o Sri Krishnappa Aged about 25 years Residing at No.47 Near Aralimara Malagala Village Nagarabhavi 2nd Stage Bengaluru – 560 072.
...Petitioner (By Sri. N. R. Naik, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka By The Station House Officer Kamakshipalya Police Station Bengaluru Represented by its SPP High Court of Karnataka Bengalluru – 01.
...Respondent (By Sri. M. Divakar Maddur – HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.PC praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr. No. 473/2015 (S.C. No. 404/2016) registered by Kamakshipalya Police Station, Bengaluru for the offence P/U/S 395 and 397 if IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The present petition has been filed by the petitioner-accused No.3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. to release him on regular bail in Crime No.473/2015 (S.C.No.404/2016) of Kamakshipalya police station, for the offence punishable under Section 395 and 397 of IPC.
2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and learned HCGP for the respondent-State.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant was working as a Field Officer under ATREG Company and the said company obtained licence from Pollution Control Board for research of drainage water. On 11.08.2015, at about 2.30 p.m., when the complainant along with his driver was proceeding in Tavera Vehicle bearing registration No.KA- 50-A-0145 and when he reached Vrushabhavathi Valley, behind St.Joseph School in Sumanahalli for the purpose of collecting drainage water in between 10.15 p.m. to 10.30 p.m., at that time, some 7 to 8 unknown persons came there and enquired them that their tractor has been stolen and told the complainant as to they were the persons who had stolen the tractor and two persons among them, caught hold the complainant and snatched the torch and assaulted on the nose of the complainant. They also snatched the Nokia mobile with Airtel sim of the complainant and one more Carbon Mobile of the driver. On the basis of complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner accused that the petitioner had obtained anticipatory bail and thereafter, after charge sheet was came to be filed, he remained absent under the impression that he has been discharged from the said offence and due to mistaken version, he has not appeared before the Court. The Court below has issued NBW and the same has not been served on him. Only when the proclamation notice was brought by the police, he came to know about the pendency of the case. He immediately applied for anticipatory bail. The said application was rejected and he voluntarily surrendered before the Court on 12.12.2018 and still he is in custody. He further submits that because of unavoidable circumstance and innocence, he has remained absent. He is ready to abide by any of the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties and also ready to face the trial, if he is released on bail. Further, there is no criminal antecedents as against the accused petitioner. On these grounds, he prays to allow the petition and to release him on bail.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP vehemently argued and submitted that the accused petitioner has violated the bail conditions and he has lost the opportunity given to him. He further submitted that the accused petitioner after availing the benefit of bail granted to him by the Court below, he has mis-used the said liberty and has not appeared before the Court and as such the Court below has issued NBW and proclamation. He is a proclaimed offender. Under the said facts and circumstances, he is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions of learned counsel appearing for the parties and also perused records.
7. As could be seen from the records, the accused petitioner has been charge sheeted under Section 395 and 397 of IPC. The alleged offence is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is the specific contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that after framing of charge, the witnesses did not turn up and even the case was not proceeded and he was under the impression that the case has been closed and he has been discharged from the alleged offence. As such, he remained absent without there being any intention. But as could be seen from the records it appears that the accused has remained absent and thereafter NBW has been issued and evidence under Section 299 of Cr.PC has also been recorded as against the accused petitioner. Though all the proceedings have been taken place, the records show that he factually surrendered before the Court below on 12.12.2018 and now he is in custody. I feel that though he has mis-used the liberty granted to him by granting bail, if one more opportunity is given to him to appear before the Court regularly and face the trial by imposing some stringent conditions, then, it is going to meet the ends of justice.
In the light of the discussions held above by me, the petition is allowed. The accused petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail in 473/2015 of Kamakshipalya Police Station, Bengalluru for the offence punishable under Sections 395 and 397 of IPC, subject to following conditions;
1. The Petitioner-accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. He shall be regular in attending the trial. If he jumps any of the conditions of the bail, the trial Court is at liberty to take him into custody until trial is concluded.
3. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
4. He shall mark his attendance on first of every month between 10.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. till trial is concluded.
5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction without prior permission of the Court.
Sd/- JUDGE PN/-