IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 617 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
Sri. Venkatesh.K, S/o. Krishnappa, Aged about 28 years, R/at Muthyalamma Temple Road, 3rd Ward, Dommasandra Village, Sarjapura Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru District.
Pin:562 125. ...Petitioner (By Sri. K. Ram Singh, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka by Sarjapura Police Station, Bengaluru District.
Represented by Government Pleader, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru – 560 001. ...Respondent (By Sri. Nasrulla Khan, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.233/2013 (C.C.No.231/2015) of Sarjapura Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences P/U/S 365, 307, 114, 120-B, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC.
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 the petitioner-accused No.2 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.233/2013 (C.C.No.231/2015) of Sarjapura Police Station, Bangalore for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 307, 114, 120(B) and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that on 01.09.2013 at about 9:20 p.m., the complainant and his cousin while going to a shop near Ayyappa Temple, Sarjapura Road, one person caught hold of the complainant’s cousin and called him. Both of them after going to some distance, another person assaulted Complainant’s cousin with rod leading him to bleeding injuries. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.2 that the petitioner- accused No.2 was earlier released on bail. Subsequently, he filed an application for anticipatory bail in Crl. Misc. No.5447/2018, without considering the facts and circumstances, the said petition was dismissed. It is further stated that the petitioner is absolutely stranger to the alleged incident and he has nothing to do with the alleged crime. He is neither directly nor indirectly involved in the alleged incident. Other accused persons have already been released on bail, on the ground of parity, he is also entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner-accused No.2 on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioner-accused No.2 is involved in the alleged offences. Already, a split up case has been registered against the petitioner-accused No.2 and thereafter, he is absconding and the trial Court has issued Non-Bailable Warrant and proclamation against him since 04.04.2015. He further submitted that the petitioner- accused No.2 is a proclaimed offender and as such, he is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. Still the investigation is in progress, if the petitioner-accused No.2 is enlarged on bail, he may abscond and may not be available for trial. On these grounds, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
7. As could be seen from the records, it indicates that earlier the petitioner-accused No.2 was released on bail and subsequently, he has remained absent and thereafter, the trial Court has issued NBW and proclamation proceedings have also been initiated since 04.04.2015. When already proclamation proceedings have been initiated then under such circumstances, the petitioner-accused No.2 is considered to be a proclaimed offender and as such, he is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of the State of Madhya Pradesh v/s Pradeep Sharma reported in AIR 2014 SC 626.
In that light, criminal petition is disposed of. Trial Court is directed in the event, if the petitioner-accused No.2 surrenders before the Court and apply for regular bail then under such circumstances, the same may be considered without above said observation on merits and disposed of expeditiously.
Sd/- JUDGE RB