IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6378/2017 BETWEEN Sri Srinivasa S/o. Subramanya, Aged about 23 years, R/at No.22, Near New Bharathi School, Kudlugate, Bengaluru-560 100 (By Sri S. Vasanth Madava, Adv.) AND The State of Karnataka, Rep. by Parappana Agrahara Police, Bengaluru-560 100 Rep. by Govt. Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru-01 (By Sri Chetan Desai, HCGP) ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.237/2017 of Parappana Agrahara Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offence punishable under Section 397 of I.P.C.
This petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER This is the petition filed by accused No.2 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking his release on bail of the alleged offence punishable under Section 394 of I.P.C., registered against unknown persons by respondent-Police Station Crime No.237/2017 and later on the offence under Section 397 I.P.C. was included and the present petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.2 during investigation.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on the night of 08.05.2017 the complainant had been to attend his work and after completing work at 6.30 p.m., he left the work place, when he was nearby Dayasagar College at 6.45 p.m., he had been to a open place to answer first call of nature and in the darkness two persons came to him, one asked him whether he is having the Beedi, for that the complainant told he was not having Beedi, then they caught hold the complainant at his collar of the shirt, threatened him not to scream and took him to by the side of the trees and the person who asked Beedi with his mobile-phone phoned another person stating that one person is with them and said him to come there. Within 2 to 3 minutes the 3rd person came there and all of them assaulted the complainant with their hands and two persons caught hold the hands of the complainant from backside, made him to lay on the ground, they kicked him with the lower limbs and another person searched the shirt pant pockets of the complainant and took cash of Rs.6,000/- so also one gold ring kept with the amount. Though, the complainant tightly hold with the pant pocket, by showing the knife assaulted the complainant on his right hand wrist portion and snatched the amount and the ring and went away. In the complaint given the features of those three persons is stated. On the basis of which, a case came to be registered firstly against the unknown persons.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused No.2 and also learned HCGP for the respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner made the submission that the remand application clearly shows that there is false implication of the petitioner in the said case. He submitted that there are four rings said to have been traced, whereas, the allegation is that the complainant is having only one ring. He also made the submission that now the investigation is completed and charge sheet is also filed and the alleged offence 397 of I.P.C. is also punishable with seven years of imprisonment.
Hence, he submits, by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP made the submission that the complainant identified those three persons and he has given the features of those 3 persons in the compliant itself. He also made the submission that there is recovery of amount and the gold ring. Hence, he submitted that there is prima facie material placed by the prosecution and the petitioner is not entitled to be granted with bail.
6. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, F.I.R., Complaint and other materials produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner along with the petition.
7. Looking to the very complaint averments it was stated by the complainant that there was darkness and two persons came to him, thereafter another 3rd one also joined them and even according to the prosecution there is no test identification parade conducted. It is no doubt true that it the case of the prosecution that during the investigation the amount and the gold ring said to have been recovered, but the petitioner herein contended that there is false implication of him in the said case. From the date of arrest the petitioner is in custody. The amount as well as gold ring said to have been robbed are already seized by the prosecution and at present nothing further is to be seized from their possession. The alleged offence under Section 397 of I.P.C. is also not exclusively punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed. The only apprehension of the prosecution that if the petitioner is released on bail he may abscond and put hurdles in the progress of the case can be safeguarded by imposing reasonable conditions. Hence, petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused No.2 is ordered to be released on bail of the alleged offence in Crime No.237/2017 registered by the respondent-police, subject to the following conditions:
i) Petitioner shall execute self bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
ii) He shall not tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
iii) He shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/- JUDGE SBS*