IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION No. 8064 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
Sathish, 28 years, S/o. Halappa @ Palakshappa Coolie Worker, R/o. Nagarakallu Road, Ajjampura Village, Tarikere Taluk, Chikkamagaluru District – 577228. …Petitioner (By Sri. N.R. Krishnappa, Advocate) AND The State by Chennagiri Police Station, Chennagiri. …Respondent (By Sri. K.P. Yoganna, HCGP) This criminal petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.92/2008 (C.C.No.76/2009) registered by Channagiri Police Station, Davanagere for the offence p/u/s 399 and 400 r/w 149 of IPC.
This criminal petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER This petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused-8 under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure praying to release him on bail in Crime No. 92/2008 (in S.C. No.125/2018) for the offence punishable under Sections 399 and 400 read with Section 149 of IPC registered by Channagiri Police Station.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State.
3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that seven persons were hiding near Benkikere Dale to commit theft of sheep which were barring in the garden, by pre-planning and also by deterring the shepherds during the night hours. On credible information the Police went to the said place and apprehended three persons and caught hold of them and the remaining persons ran away. The Police seized the rope, battery, matches, axe and chilli powder from the accused and case was registered in Crime No.92/2008.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner/accused-8 was not present at the time when the police have apprehended accused Nos. 1 to 3. Only with an intention to bring provisions of Section 399 and 400 falsely petitioner/accused -9 has been implicated as an accused. He further submitted that already accused Nos. 1 to 7 are tried and acquitted of the charges. The bail application of this petitioner is rejected by an order dated 04.09.2018 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Davanagere. All the accused persons have been acquitted on the ground that the chilli powder which is said to has been seized was containing the date of manufacturing as April 2010, wherein, the alleged incident has taken place in 2008. That itself clearly goes to show that false implication of petitioner/accused-8 in the said crime. He further submitted that moreover, the alleged offence against the petitioner is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation, abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds he prayed to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the case is registered in the year 2008 and thereafter accused-petitioner was absconding and thereafter split up charge sheet has been filed and his presence could not be secured and the court issued NBW and proclamation as against this petitioner. At this juncture if the accused is released on bail he may abscond, he may not be available for the trial and he may tamper with the prosecution evidence. On this ground he prayed to dismiss the bail petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State and perused the records.
7. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that already accused Nos. 1 to 7 have been tried in S.C. No.20/2019 and they have been acquitted. Even it is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the chilli powder packet which has been seized is manufactured in April 2010 and the incident has taken place in the year 2008. That itself clearly goes to show the false implication of the accused in the case. When already other accused persons have been acquitted by holding that there are no witness. Under such circumstances the custodial continuation of the accused -8 is not necessary. However, it is the submission of the learned HCGP if he is released on bail he may abscond and he may not be available for the trial. The offence is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In that light, I feel that if the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail by putting stringent conditions it would meet the ends of justice.
8. Taking into consideration the said facts and circumstances of the case, petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused No.8 is ordered to be released on bail in Crime No. 92/2008 (S.C. No.125/208) with following conditions.
1. Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. He shall regularly attend the trial. If he remain absent in any one of the dates without just cause or if he hampers the trial the trial court can take him to custody as contended under Section 309 of Cr.P.C.
3. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence either directly or indirectly.
4. He shall not leave jurisdiction of the court without prior permission.
5. He shall mark his attendance once in every first day of month between 10.00 a.m., to 5.00 p.m., before the jurisdictional police station till the trial is concluded.
Sd/- JUDGE BVK