IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29th DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION No.8609/2018 BETWEEN:
1. Sri Shanmugam S/o Marappa Goundar @ Ponnu Swamy Aged about 40 years 2. Smt. Pushpamma W/o Marappa Goundar @ Ponnu Swamy Aged about 55 years Both are R/at Marahalli Village Nanjangud Taluk Mysore District-571 301.
… Petitioners (By Sri Omkar Basavaprabhu, Advocate for Sri R. Srinivas Advocate) AND:
State by Kowlande Police Station Nanjangud Taluk, Mysore District, Represented by State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Bangalore-560 001.
(By Sri K.P. Yoganna, HCGP) … Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.120/2017 (S.C.No.221/2017) of Kowlande Police Station, Mysuru District, for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.
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 petitioners/ accused Nos.2 and 3 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to release them on anticipatory bail in Crime No.120/2017 of Kowlande police station for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the complaint was registered on 15.5.2017 alleging that accused Nos.1 to 3 caused the death of the deceased by assaulting with iron pipe and thereafter after investigation charge sheet was filed against accused No.1 by leaving out the present petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3, thereafter, the trail was commenced by the Court. During the course of evidence PW1-the complainant has deposed that when the deceased was tying the cows in the cattle shed all the three accused persons came with iron rod, hit the husband of the complainant and kicked him. Due to which he succumbed to the injuries. As such, an application came to be filed under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. to include petitioners as accused Nos.2 and 3 in the said case. Apprehending their arrest, they are before this Court.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that, at the time of filing the charge sheet, the names of petitioners have been left out, after perusal of the records there is no material as against petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3. Now the Court after considering the evidence of PW1 has taken the cognizance under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. and issued the summons. They are apprehending their arrest, hence, prays for releasing them on anticipatory bail.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the evidence of PW1 clearly goes to show that the petitioners/accused are clearly involved in the alleged offences and as such the application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. has been filed. If they are released on bail, they may abscond and may not be available for trial. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records.
7. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that at the time of filing the charge sheet the names of petitioners have not been mentioned, it is only after filing the application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. the names have been included. That is the matter which has to be considered and appreciated at the time of trial. Now the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 are apprehending their arrest. the Court has taken cognizance under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. Under the said facts and circumstances there is apprehension that they may be arrested and they may not be released on bail. They are ready to face the trial. Hence, by imposing stringent conditions if the petitioners/accused are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail, it is going to meet the ends of justice.
8. In the light of the discussions held by me above, the petition is allowed and petitioners/accused No.2 and 3 are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest in Crime No.120/2017 of Kowlande Police Station, for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w 34 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
i) Each of the petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
ii) They shall surrender before the VII Additional Sessions Judge, Mysuru, within 15 days from today, failing which this order shall stand automatically cancelled.
iii) They shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
iv) They shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the Court.
v) They shall be regular in attending the Court on all dates of hearing.
Sd/- JUDGE *AP/-