IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
Criminal Petition No.8911 of 2017 Between:
1. Sri.Puneeth Kumar alias Punith alias Goolur S/o Late Nagesh, Aged about 19 years, R/a Anasuyamma’s House, Near Yellamma Temple, Kothanur Dinne Bus Stop, Kothanur, Bengaluru 562 101.
2. Sri.Girish alias Auto Shivu, S/o Giriyappa, Aged about 25 years, R/a No.7, Near Plegamma Temple, Begehalli, Bannerghatta Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru Urban District – 572 121.
... Petitioners (By Sri.Siddamallappa P.M, Advocate) And State of Karnataka, By SHO, Thalaghattapura Police. (By Sri.Chetan Desai, HCGP) ... Respondent This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.284/2017 of Thalaghattapur Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offence punishable under Section 364(A) read with Section 149 of IPC.
This petition coming on for Orders this day, the court made the following:
ORDER This is a petition filed by petitioners-accused Nos.
1 and 6 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C seeking their release on bail for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 364A read with Section 149 of IPC registered by the respondent police in Crime No.284/2017.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for respondent State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that rejection of petition of other accused persons will not come in the way of these petitions, because this petition is under Section 439 of Cr.P.C whereas, petition of other accused persons rejected were filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail. He also submits that FIR came to be registered against 8-9 unknown persons and that from the date of arrest petitioners are in custody. Hence, he made submission that by imposing reasonable conditions petitioners- accused Nos.1 and 6 may be enlarged on bail.
4. Per contra, learned HCGP opposed the petition by submitting that this Court has already rejected the bail petition of other accused persons filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C as the investigation is still going on. He submitted that at this stage, petitioners are not entitled to be released on bail till the completion of investigation and filing of final report. Hence, he submits to reject the petition.
5. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, complaint and other materials produced in the case. It is noted from the complaint averments that the incident is alleged to have taken place on 06.10.2017 when the complainant and her husband Sampath Kumar were proceeding on two wheeler at about 2.00 p.m in order to bring sewing machine in an auto rickshaw. It is the contention of the prosecution that at that moment of time 8-9 unknown persons all of a sudden came and forcibly took husband of the complainant in an auto rickshaw. The offence under Section 364A is punishable with death or life imprisonment. As submitted by learned HCGP, the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, at this stage it is not appropriate for this Court to release the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 6 on bail.
6. The Court is also not touching on the merits of the case. Immediately after completion of investigation and filing of the final report, petitioners are at liberty to move the concerned court seeking their bail.
Accordingly, petition is hereby disposed of.
Sd/- Judge dn/-