IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9490 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
Abhishek, 25 years, S/o. Devaraj, R/at. Basaralu Hobli, Hallegere, Krishnarajpet, Mandya District -571426. …Petitioner (By Sri. Prakash M.H., Advocate) AND State of Karnataka, By Kunigal Police, Tumkur District. …Respondent (By Sri. Chandramouli, SPP) This criminal petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.416/2018 registered by Kunigal Police Station, Tumakuru for the offence punishable under Sections 395 and 397, 120B, 201 and 109 of IPC.
This criminal petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure praying to release him on bail in Crime No. 416/2018 of Kunigal Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 395 and 397, 120B, 201 and 109 of IPC.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned SPP for the respondent/State.
3. The gist of the complaint is that on 14.11.2018 when the complainant was traveling in private bus from Kunigal to Tumakuru, the present petitioner and other accused persons quarreled with him under the guise that he is the husband of their sister and got him out of the bus near Kottagere and then took him forcibly and robbed Rs.5,13,705/- which was in his possession by spraying chilli powder on him and in the said process, they have also caused injury to his right arm by stabbing with the knife, on the basis of the complaint a case has been registered.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that accused-8 is alleged to be one among the other accused persons and the complaint which has been registered initially on allegations made against 4 persons and after 8 days it has been improved, now 9 members were there in the alleged incident. He further submitted that test identification parade has also been completed and the accused person has not been identified by the complainant. The complainant has identified other accused persons. He further submitted that there is no any recovery and there are no overt –act. Even subsequent statement has been recorded in respect of the complainant and he has identified and mentioned the name of the other accused persons and the complainant has not specifically stated, what is the overt acts which have been done by the accused petitioner. He further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed and even the injuries which have been suffered by the complainant are simple in nature and he submitted that already accused Nos. 1 to 10 are released on bail. Under similar facts and circumstances the petitioner is also entitled to be released on bail. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and also ready to furnish sureties. On these ground the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition and to release the petitioner-accused on bail.
5. Per contra, the learned SPP vehemently argued and submitted that there is prima-facie case made out against the accused petitioner, even recovery is also considered to be the more important material in such cases. The mobile phone is seized at the instance of the accused- petitioner. All the accused persons have conspired and they are equally liable for the alleged offences. He further submitted that accused-petitioner has involved in serious offences, if he is released on bail he may abscond and may not be available for investigation. Under such circumstances, he may not be eligible to release on bail. On these grounds he prayed to dismiss the bail petition.
6. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the arguments and charge-sheet, complaint, medical certificate and materials which are made available in this regard.
7. As could be seen from the injury certificate and complainant has been suffered from 3 injuries and the said injuries are simple in nature. Even as could be seen from the entire charge-sheet material there is no consistent stand taken by the complainant. There is no independent overt-act alleged as against the petitioner-accused and the allegations disclose that, two persons have picked-up quarrel and stopped the bus and dragged the complainant out of the bus and two more people who were following the bus on their motorcycle, joined the accused and they forcibly took the complainant and robbed the said amount. Subsequently he said that totally there were four accused persons. Even if the entire material acceded to be true there is no specific overt- act against the petitioner-accused No.8. Further learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that the recovery of mobile phone and Rs.5,000/- at the instance of petitioner- accused and this is the subject matter which has to be considered and appreciated at the time of trial. Further, the alleged offence is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and charge sheet has also been filed. Under such facts and circumstances, if the accused-petitioner is ordered to be released on bail then it going to 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. 416/2018 subject to the 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 not tamper with the prosecution evidence either directly or indirectly.
3. He shall not indulge himself into the said criminal activities.
4. He shall not leave jurisdiction 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