IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL.R.B CRIMINAL PETITION No.6331 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
SRI SABANNA S/O LATE NAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDING AT AKKIYAPPA GARDEN MOHANKUMAR NAGAR YESHWANTHAPURA BENGALURU 560 022.
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF TADAS VILLAGE, SHIGGAON TALUK HAVERI DISTRICT 581110.
… PETITIONER (BY SRI B.A.BELLIAPPA, ADV.) AND:
STATE BY YESHWANTHPURA P.S REPRESENTED BY ITS S.P.P HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE – 01.
… RESPONDENT (BY SRI CHETAN DESAI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR. NO.265/2015 OF YESHWANTHAPURA P.S., BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 338, 304 OF IPC AND SEC.9(B) AND SEC. 3, 5 OF EXPLOSIVE SUBSTANCES ACT.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail of the alleged offenses punishable under Sections 304 and 338 of IPC and also under Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Section 9(B) of the Explosives Act, 1884 registered in the Respondent-Police Station in Crime No.265/2015.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that, on 09-09-2014, one Manjunath and his daughter while watching television in the house of the accused, the explosion took place and in the said explosion, both Manjunath and his daughter suffered injuries. The daughter suffered fatal one and she died during the course of treatment. However, Manjunath survived. Based on the said information, a case came to be registered for the alleged offenses as against the present petitioner.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned High Court Government Pleader for the Respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner drawing the attention of this Court to Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act made a submission that there is no intention on the part of the present petitioner to keep the explosive substances in the house to cause death of the deceased, so also injuries to Manjunath. In the bail application before the Sessions Court, it was stated that the present petitioner had kept the said substance in his house in order to use it for killing the pigs, hence there is no malicious intention on the part of the petitioner to cause the said incident. He further submitted that now the investigation is completed and charge sheet is also filed. Hence prays for release of the petitioner on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the materials placed on record clearly establishes that the accused was not possessing any license to keep the explosive substances in the house and it is he who has to explain about these things. He also submits that the offences alleged against the petitioner are serious in nature and hence he is not entitled to be granted with bail.
6. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, Complaint, charge sheet and other materials produced by the petitioner.
7. Earlier the case came to be registered in UDR as per Section 174(c) of Cr.P.C. But six months after the registration of UDR and basing on the report of the Experts regarding presence of crude bomb composition such as sulphur and arsenic sulphide, a case came to be registered for the offences under Sections 304 and 338 of IPC and also under Sections 3 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act and under Section 9(B) of the Explosives Act. The petitioner had approached this Court earlier at the crime stage seeking anticipatory bail in Crl.P.No.7865/2016 and this Court by its order dated 30-05-2017 rejected the said petition observing that in view of serious allegations, custodial interrogation of the present petitioner is necessary. No doubt, as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that now investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed, but as submitted by the learned High Court Government Pleader and looking into the nature of offences alleged, keeping the explosive substances without there being any license is a serious matter which resulted in the death of daughter of Manjunath and injuries to Manjunath. Taking into consideration all these materials placed on record, I am of the opinion that it is not a fit case to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the petition is hereby rejected.
However, in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since from the date of arrest, the petitioner is in custody, the concerned Sessions Court has 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 a copy of this order.
The Registry is hereby directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned Sessions Court immediately.
Sd/- JUDGE mpk/-*