Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Syed Imran @ Immu vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|20 November, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7657 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
SYED IMRAN @ IMMU, S/O. LATE BABU, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/AT NO.303, NEAR STAR ZIM, MANIPAL, COUNTRY ROAD, SINGASANDRA, BENGALURU CITY, BENGALURU-560068.
(BY SRI. RAJASHEKARA R.V., ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MALAVALLI RURAL POLICE, MALAVALLI TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571430. REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
(BY SRI. HONNAPPA, HCGP) ******* ..PETITIONER ..RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL CR.NO.137/2018 (C.C.NO.62/2019) OF MALAVALLI RURAL P.S., MANDYA FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 397 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent - State. Perused the records.
2. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.2 in C.C.No.62/2019 (Crime No.137/2018 of Malavalli Rural Police Station, Mandya) for the offence punishable under section 397 of IPC which is now pending on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Malavalli, Mandya District. Investigation has already been completed and charge sheet has already been filed.
3. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that, on 10.04.2018, the complainant by name Raju.N. who was owning a Tata Indica Car bearing registration No.KA.55.2667 and driving the same for hire, was waiting for the customer. At about 9.45 p.m., some three persons came and talked with the complainant to go over to a place called Talagavadi, fixing the rent at Rs.1,300/- and then they proceeded in the car. Thereafter, when the car reached near Madahalli, at that time, the accused persons asked the complainant to take a turn in a small road and thereafter asked him to stop the car near a coconut garden and two accused persons alighted the car and went towards coconut garden. When they did not return even after ten minutes, one accused person who was in the car tried calling them over mobile phone and he also went towards coconut garden. Afterwards, those three persons came near the car. All of a sudden, one person assaulted on the right cheek of the complainant with a brick, another person pulled the complainant by putting a rope around his neck and third person assaulted the complainant with a club on his left shoulder and all the three persons together assaulted the complainant on his face and caused bleeding injury. They also robbed Rs.2000/-, purse and a mobile belonging to the complainant.
4. The said complaint was lodged on 10.04.2018 and accused were arrested in connection with some other case. But there is no recovery as such from the accused persons. The records disclose that the car was abandoned at some place, which was detected by the police personnel and brought to the police station. The mobile phone was also found inside the said car. Therefore, there is no recovery as such from the accused person in this case. The petitioner/accused No.2 was identified in the police station by the complainant when he was arrested in connection with some other case.
5. Looking to the above facts and circumstances, identification has to be done during the course of investigation and recovery of said car has to be connected to the accused No.2/petitioner herein in order to draw any inference of guilt against the petitioner during the course of full dressed trial and offences are neither punishable with death nor life imprisonment and in view of accused No.2/petitioner has already been in jail for more than one year and investigation is already completed and charge sheet is filed, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail with certain conditions. Hence, the following:-
ORDER The Petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner (A2) shall be released on bail in connection with C.C.No.62/2019 arising out of Crime No.137/2018 of Malavalli Rural Police Station, Mandya District, for the alleged offences, now pending on the file of Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C. at Malavalli, Mandya District, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the trial court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional court on all the future hearing dates unless exempted by the court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the court till the case registered against him is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Bss.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Syed Imran @ Immu vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
20 November, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra