IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8399/2017 BETWEEN:
1. SRI. SURESH D, S/O DEVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, MASSON WORK, R/OF MOTALU JAINU GRAMA, PIBODAGATTA MALLANURU POST, KUPPAM TALUK, CHITTURU DISTRICT, ANDRAPRADESH.
NOW R/OF K.K. LAYOUT, SRINIVASA BAKERY ROAD, HOSAKOTE, BANGALORE-562114.
2. CHANDRASHEKAR, S/O MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, WIRING WORK, R/OF SUGAR MIL POST, PALA ROAD, ELCANKOTTAIAH GRAMA, DHARAMAPURA DISTRICT-638656.
3. MALLAPPA, S/O PEDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, MASSON WORK, R/OF MOTALLUSHERU GRAMA, PIBODAGATTA MALLANURU POST, KUPPAM TALUK, CHITTURU DISTRICT, ANDRAPRADESH.
NOW R/OF K.K. LAYOUT, SRINIVASA BAKERY ROAD, HOSAKOTE, BANGALORE-562114.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI.CHETHAN B., ADV.) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY CHANNAGIRI POLICE, REP BY: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE – 560 001.
...RESPONDENT (BY SRI.CHETAN DESAI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN CR.NO.120/2017 OF CHANNAGIRI P.S., DAVANAGERE DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 395 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.5, 6 and 7 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking their release on bail of the offences punishable under Section 384 of IPC, registered in respondent – police station Crime No.120/2017. But subsequently, after completing investigation, offence under Section 395 of IPC came to be inserted in place of Section 384 of IPC.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners during the course of his arguments has submitted that looking to the prosecution material serious allegations are against accused Nos.1 and 2 and so far as the petitioners are concerned there are no such serious allegations, except the allegation that they were loading the arecanut bags into the vehicle of accused No.4. He further submitted that the identity of the petitioners is not established by cogent material. Now the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed, hence, by imposing reasonable conditions, petitioners may be enlarged on bail.
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader, during the course of his arguments has submitted that test identification parade has been conducted in the presence of Taluka Executive Magistrate, who has also been cited as charge sheet witness. He also submitted that there is prima-facie material about the involvement of the petitioners in the alleged offence punishable under Section 395 of IPC, hence, petitioners are not entitled for grant of bail.
5. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other materials placed on record, so also, the entire charge sheet material.
6. The materials placed on record show that the petitioners were loading the arecanut, which were in 16 bags, in the vehicle of accused No.4, after taking out from the house of the complainant. Regarding the identity of the petitioners, test identification parade has been conducted during the course of investigation. Arecanut bags were also recovered and the statement of panch witnesses, in whose presence arecanut bags were recovered, were also recorded by the I.O. during investigation. The materials show that it is accused Nos.5 and 7 along with other accused loaded arecanut bags into the Van said to have been brought by accused No.4. Considering these materials there is prima-facie material about the involvement of petitioners in committing the alleged offence. The alleged offence is serious in nature, therefore, I am of the opinion that it is not a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, petition is hereby rejected.
Sd/- JUDGE BSR