IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B. CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9198/2017 BETWEEN 1. SMT. SULTHANA @ NEHA @ SNEHA, W/O MANJUNATH @ UDAY, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT 6TH CROSS, SULTHANPALYA, BENGALURU – 560032.
2. SMT. SABEENA, W/O SAMUHA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT 7TH CROSS, HEBBALA BENGALURU – 560024.
PERMANENT R/AT JANIPURA, GOPALNAGAR, UTTARAPARAGANA WEST BENGAL – 743710.
3. RAJKUMAR @ EDIGARAJU, S/O RANGASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, R/AT EREGODU VILLAGE, DONA TALUK, KARNUL DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH – 534007.
4. RIDHOY, S/O RIJULLA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/AT JANIPURA, GOPALNAGAR, CHABHEES PARAGANA, KOLKATA– 700026 WEST BENGAL.
(BY SRI MOHANKUMAR D., ADVOCATE) AND STATE OF KARNATAKA, STATE BY HENNUR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU REP. BY HIGH COURT GOVT. PLEADER, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU – 560001.
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI CHETAN DESAI, HCGP) (BY SMT. MANJUSHREE FOR APPLICANT) ...RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.439 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONERS ON BAIL IN CR.NO. 380/2017 OF HENNUR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/Ss. 3, 4, 5 AND 7 OF I.T.P. ACT AND SEC. 370, 370(A) AND 366(B) OF IPC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The application in I.A.No.1/2017 filed by the learned counsel Smt. Manjushree for the complainant to come on record and assist the prosecution is allowed.
2. This is the petition filed by the accused Nos.1 to 4 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking their release on bail of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 7 of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, 1956 and Sections 370, 370(A) of I.P.C., registered by the respondent-Police in Crime No.380/2017.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, so also, the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners made the submission that though it is stated that the said raid was conducted on 02.11.2017, but the F.I.R. came to registered only on 03.11.2017. He also made the submission that all the petitioners are said to have been procured from the place itself, but it is mentioned wrongly that they have absconded. Learned counsel also made the submission that looking to the statement of victim so far as petitioner Nos.3 and 4 are concerned absolutely there are no allegation. Learned counsel also relied upon the order of this Court dated 17.12.2015 passed in Crl.P.No.7110/2011. Hence, he submitted that by imposing reasonable conditions the petitioners may be enlarged on regular bail.
4. Per contra, learned HCGP opposed the petition and submitted that looking to the material placed on record serious allegations are made against all the petitioners herein and during the raid, the presence of all the four petitioners herein was noticed by the police and they were taken to the custody. He submitted that now the investigation of the case is transferred to CCB Bengaluru and it is still going on. Hence, submitted that at this stage the petitioners may not be released on bail.
4. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, F.I.R., Complaint and other materials produced in the case. So far as the decision in the order of this Court dated 17.12.2015, relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners, that is the petition filed under section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings and now we are considering bail petition, apart from that, learned HCGP submitted that the matter is still under investigation.
5. Looking to the nature of the alleged offences and the seriousness, I am of the opinion that, at this stage it is not proper for this Court to allow the petition and release them on bail. However, after completion of investigation and filing of the final report, the petitioners are at liberty to move the concerned Court.
With the above observations for the present, the petition is rejected.
Sd/- JUDGE Sbs*