IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1411 OF 2019 BETWEEN 1. SRI KUMARA, S/O. LATE CHIKKAMUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST 2. SMT. SUJATHA, W/O. KUMARA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT No.806, WARD No.17, DASARA BEEDI, DEVANAHALLI TOWN, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT – 562 110. (BY SRI S. VENUGOPALA, ADVOCATE) AND ... PETITIONERS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY DEVANAHALLI POLICE, DEVANAHALLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT – 562 110.
REPRESENTED BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE.
(BY SRI NASARULLA KHAN, H.C.G.P.) ... RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 438 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF THEIR ARREST IN CR.NO.09/2019 REGISTERED BY DEVANAHALLI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 306 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This petition is filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure for granting of anticipatory bail.
2. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.09/2019 of Devanahalli Town Police pending on the file of Court of Civil Judge & JMFC, Devanahalli, Bengaluru Rural District for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC.
3. The allegation against the petitioners are that the complainant-Smt. Renuka wife of the deceased-late Krishnamurthy lodged the complaint to the police alleging that these petitioners and other accused were said to be harassing the deceased and they were torturing her husband for payment of interest of refund principle amount, not able to repay the loan, due to which her husband consumed poison on 29.01.2019 at 4 p.m. and died on 30.01.2019 at 10 p.m. when he was admitted in the Manasa Nursing Home. After registering the case, the Police filed the charge sheet against these petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC. The Police are making effort to arrest the petitioner for having committed non-bailable offence. Hence, this petition.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that accused No.1 is an agriculturist and accused No.2 is doing tailoring work for their livelihood and they have no money to lend to the deceased as alleged in the complaint, the deceased could have committed suicide for some other reasons. The wife of the deceased has made false complaint against the petitioners. Hence, praying for granting of bail.
5. The learned High Court Government Pleader argued that there is sufficient material placed against the accused for the commission of offence and from the date of registering the case, they are absconding. They are required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, prayed for dismissing the petition.
6. Upon hearing the arguments and averments in the complaint goes to show that the petitioners are said to be lent loan to the deceased where the deceased have borrowed loan and spent towards the business and suffered huge loss and unable to repay the loan amount, due to which he has committed suicide, though the alleged offence under Section 306 of IPC which is non-bailable but not punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
7. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case without expressing opinion on the merits of the case, I hold that there is sufficient material placed on record to grant anticipatory bail, imposing stringent condition, if the petition is allowed, no prejudice would cause to the prosecution case.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed.
The respondent-Police is directed to release the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail in the event of their arrest for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC read with Section 34 of IPC., registered by the respondent-Police in Crime No.09/2019 subject to the following conditions:
i) The petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 are ordered to be enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each with a surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer or Committal Court.
ii) Petitioners shall not indulge in similar offences strictly;
iii) Petitioners shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses directly/ indirectly;
iv) Petitioners shall not leave the jurisdiction without prior permission of the trial Court and v) Petitioners shall mark their attendance before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m. on every Monday for a period of six months or till commencement of trial whichever is earlier.
vi) Petitioners are deemed to be in custody for the purpose of recovery under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Sd/- JUDGE GBB