IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7996/2018 Between:
Gowtham, Aged 23 years, S/o Venkatesh, R/at No.237, Ramanna Garden, U – Mission Road, Near Poornima Talkies, Bengaluru – 560 027. ...Petitioner (By Sri.R.K.Mahadeva, Advocate) And:
The State of Karnataka, By Ashok Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru City, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bengaluru – 560 001. ...Respondent (By Sri. K.P.Yoganna, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.379/2013 (S.C.No.1468/2014) of Ashoknagar P.S., Bangalore for the offence P/U/S 397 of IPC and Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R This petition filed by petitioner-accused No.1 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail in Crime No.379/2013 of Ashok Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 397 of IPC and also under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State.
3. The brief facts of the case are that a complaint was registered alleging that on 20.7.2013 at about 1.15 a.m., the complainant and his friends were traveling in a car bearing registration No.KA-51-MB 8686 and when they came near Richmond park, 3-4 unknown persons came on a Motor Bike and robbed Rs.9000/- and two mobiles by showing a revolver. The accused persons also assaulted his friend, who was driving the car causing injuries to him. Hence, a complaint was registered.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner –accused No.1 that he was enlarged on bail in the above said crime number and he was regularly appearing before the court below. But subsequently, he was apprehended and was in custody in Cr.No.357/2012 registered by Electronic City Police Station and as such, he did not appear before the court. By an order dated 29.7.2017, body warrant has been issued by the court below. It is further submitted that in Cr.No.357/2012 he was enlarged on bail by the LVIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge (CCH-59) Bengaluru City in S.C.No.1071/2017 by order dated 27.9.2018. Thereafter the bail petition has been filed. But the trial court without considering the said fact, only on the ground that again he may abscond and tamper the prosecution evidence and jump bail, rejected his bail application without any just cause. If bail is granted, the petitioner is ready to abide by the conditions that is imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to release the petitioner/accused No.1 on bail.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that accused No.1-petitoner has remained absent and thereafter he has been secured by issuance of body warrant and T.I. parade has also been conducted. In the said T.I. parade, complainant and other witnesses have identified accused No.1. Further he has also stated that, if the accused No.1-petiotoner is enlarged on bail, he may abscond and not attend the court regularly causing delay in the proceedings. On these grounds, she prayed to dismiss the petition.
6 I have carefully and cautiously gone through the contents of the complaint and other materials on record. I have also gone through the order sheet in S.C.No.1468/2014. As could be seen from the records, accused No.1 to 4 were released on bail and subsequently on 14.9.2016 accused remained absent and non-bailable warrant was issued and subsequently it is noticed that accused No.1 is in custody and as such, on 29.7.2017 body warrant has been issued, which fact clearly goes to show that the accused No.1 remained absent on 14.9.2016 without intention. Hence he has been apprehended and detained in custody in Cr.No.357/2012. Even the records also indicate that subsequently the present petitioner-accused No.1, who was accused No.16 has been released on bail in Cr.No.357/2012 on the ground that he may not abscond or jump from bail. I feel that there are no justifiable grounds to reject the bail application. Hence, I am of the considered view that by imposing stringent conditions, the accused no.1-petitoner is to be released on bail, which would meet the ends of justice.
In the light of the discussions made above, petition is allowed. Petitioner/accused No.1 is enlarged on bail in Crime No.379/2013 of Ashok Nagar Police Station pending on the file of LIX Addl. City Civil Judge Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City in S.C.No.1468/2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 397 of IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, subject to the following conditions:
1. Petitioner/accused No.1 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 witnesses directly or indirectly.
3. He shall attend the trial court regularly till the completion of the trial.
4. In the event, if he again jumps bail, then the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail and take him to custody.
Sd/- JUDGE Psg*