IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.4245/2019 Between:
Sri Ramesh, S/o Late Chikka Akkalappa, Aged about 35 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o Angerakarahalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Taluk & District Chikkaballapur – 562 101. … Petitioner (By Sri Veeranna G. Tigadi, Advocate) And:
State of Karnataka, Rep. by Sub-Inspector of Police, Chikkaballapur Rural Police Station, Chikkaballapur, District: Chikkaballapur, Rep. by State Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru – 560 001. …Respondent (By Sri S. Rachaiah, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr. No.84/2019 of Chikkaballapura Rural Police Station, Chikkaballapura for the offences p/u/s 143, 147, 148, 307, 323, 324, 332, 353, 504, 506 r/w 149 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER Petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on anticipatory bail with respect to the proceedings in Crime No.84/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 506, 323, 324, 332, 307, 353 read with Section 149 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 09.05.2009, a complaint came to be filed stating that information was received that a group of people were playing “Andar Bahar” near Bhanu Sound System. The complainant along with the police staff proceeded to the spot, apprehended and had taken into custody Madhava S/o. Mugappa and others. The amount of Rs.1030/- was seized from the possession of the said persons. As the said persons were being taken in the Government vehicle after arrest, it is alleged that the accused persons had formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and had assaulted the constable – Somashekar. It is stated that the petitioner had assaulted the police constable – Muthappa Nigari with stone resulting in injuries on fingers and on right hand. On the basis of the above said facts and on receiving a complaint, FIR is registered and investigation is in progress.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the injuries are simple in nature and that the proof of offence is a matter for trial and prima facie no case is made out as regards the commission of offence under Section 307 of IPC. It is further submitted that the other offences not being punishable with imprisonment for life or death, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail. It is also submitted that in light of alleged act of the petitioner being against the police officials, custodial interrogation would expose the petitioner to harassment.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader opposes grant of bail and states that the act of obstructing the police official in performing his duties is a matter to be taken serious note of.
5. It is noticed that injuries are simple in nature. Admittedly, there are no criminal antecedents. Question of proof of offence is a matter for trial, case for custodial interrogation is not made out. It is made clear that for the limited purpose of recovery, respondent – Police could take the petitioner into custody, if circumstances so warrant. Accordingly, petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
6. Accordingly, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.84/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 506, 323, 324, 332, 307, 353 read with Section 149 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall appear in person before the Investigating Officer in connection with Crime No.84/2019 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) with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way, any witness.
(iii) The petitioner shall physically present himself and mark his 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.
(iv) The respondent – Police is at liberty to take the petitioner into custody for the limited purpose of recovery, if circumstances so warrant.
(v) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(vi) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner, 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.
Sd/- JUDGE VP