IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7367 OF 2019 BETWEEN :
SRI. SHASHI @ SHASHI KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/AT ‘SHIVALAYA’, MOORUKATTE, KUMPALA, SOMESHWARA VILLAGE, KOTEKAR POST, MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA-575 022.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI: S. VENKATESHWARA BABU, FOR SMT. SHWETHA RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATES) AND :
STATE BY, THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ULLAL POLICE STATION, ULLAL, MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-575 022. KARNATAKA STATE REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-01.
... RESPONDENT (BY SRI: ROHITH B.J., HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN THE CRIME NO.295/2013 OF ULLAL POLICE STATION, MANGALURU CITY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 144, 147, 148, 448, 326, 307, 435, 120(B), R/W SECTION 149 OF IPC & SECTION 2(B) OF KPDLP ACT.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent – State. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.7 in C.C. No.643/2014, later a Sessions Case has been registered in S.C. No.115/2015. The case has been split up against this petitioner in S.C. No.172/2018. It is submitted that the petitioner surrendered himself before the court and applied for grant of bail. However, the III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Mangalore has dismissed the said application on the ground that he absconded himself from the clutches of law and with great difficulty, his presence has been secured. But the order in Sessions Case No.172/2018 dated 17.09.2019 discloses that the petitioner voluntarily surrendered before the court on 07.08.2019. But records discloses that the other accused persons were acquitted on 26.03.2019. Perhaps after coming to know about the said acquittal order, he has surrendered himself before the court. But, there is no explanation for his non- appearance for all these days. The offences under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 448, 326, 307, 435, 120(B), r/w Section 149 of IPC was tried by the Sessions Court. So far as the other accused persons are concerned, they are acquitted in S.C. No.115/2015 vide judgment dated 26.03.2019. There is no need for this court to go in detail with regard to the factual base of the case and overt-act of the petitioner. In view of the acquittal of the other accused persons for the same offences, when the common allegations are made against all the accused, in my view, in order to provide one chance to the petitioner so far he could appear before the trial court on all further hearing dates and in order to dispose of the case, he has to be enlarged on bail. However, the absconding of the accused made loss to the exchequer of this State, and it is also taken note of this court.
3. With the above said observations, the following order is passed:
O R D E R The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.295/2013 of Ullal Police Station for the offence under sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 448, 326, 307, 435, 120(B), r/w Section 149 of IPC Section 2(B) of KPDLP Act, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional court on all the future hearing dates unless exempted by the court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
(v) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- before the Trial Court towards the expenses of the trial and the same shall be forfeited to the State after the trial against the petitioner is over or for any reasons, the proceedings are terminated.
(vi) This bail order will not come to the help of the petitioner if he remains absent on any two consecutive dates before the trial court without intimation to the court or without taking any exemption from the court. In that eventuality, the trial court is at liberty to take the petitioner to the custody for the purpose of further trial.
Sd/- JUDGE Snc