IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.3107/2019 Between:
Theja Swaroop P., S/o Gopal Naidu P., Aged about 31 years, B. Tech and Proprietor, Pragnya IAS Academy, R/at No.1514, 19th Main Road, 1st Sector, HSR Layout, Bangalore – 560 102. … Petitioner (By Sri S. Shankarappa, Advocate) And:
State of Karnataka, By High Grounds P.S., Rep. by SPP, High Court Complex, Bangalore – 560 001. … Respondent (By Sri S. Rachaiah, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr. No.146/2017 of High Grounds Police Station, Bangalore for the offences p/u/s 143, 109, 120B, 323, 324, 326, 307, 148 r/w 149 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER The petitioner-accused No.1 is seeking to be enlarged on bail in connection with his detention pursuant to the proceedings in Crime No.146/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 120-B, 109, 323, 324, 326, 307, 148 and 149 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 19.08.2017 the Station House Officer of High Grounds Police Station have recorded the sworn in statement of Satish.P and Ram Murthy Naidu. It is stated that the complainant was working at Infosys, which is a Software Company. It is stated that he had boarded SRS mini bus at HSR Layout and reached the bus stand at 9.45 p.m. and as he got down from SRS mini bus, it is alleged that three unknown persons who dragged the complainant from SRS Travels Office to Volvo Car Showroom, which was near by and assaulted the complainant on his left shoulder, left chest, right abdomen, right thigh and assaulted on his head with tiles inflicting injury. In light of the said incident, the complaint was lodged and pursuant to which, FIR is registered and investigation being complete charge sheet has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the complainant and other persons, who were earlier employees of petitioner had started a separate Academy called Pragnya IAS Academy doing the same work as that of the Institute of the petitioner.
4. It is stated that even as per the version made out in the charge sheet, the overt acts are attributed to accused Nos.4, 6 and 7. The imputation as regards accused No.1 is that he was the brain behind the offence and had conspired and engaged the services of other accused, i.e. accused Nos.4, 6 and 7 to attack the complainant at the instance of the petitioner.
5. The learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State contends that despite overt acts being attributed to accused Nos.4, 6 and 7 and in light of the criminal antecedents, the petitioner ought to be denied relief of being enlarged on bail.
6. As regards the contention that there were prior criminal antecedents, the learned counsel for the petitioner points out that two cases that have been lodged against the petitioner are at the instance of complainant and by former employees in the Institute of the petitioner now working with the competitor and hence contends that the question of criminal antecedents ought to be looked at in the proper perspective.
7. The question as to whether accused No.1 had set up accused Nos.4, 6 and 7 to attack and injure the complainant and as to whether he and accused Nos.4, 6 and 7 have taken money from accused No.1 is a matter to be established during trial. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that accused Nos.3 and 4 have been enlarged on bail by the Sessions Court and that accused No.5 has been enlarged on anticipatory bail and accused Nos.6, 7 and 8 have been enlarged on regular bail. In light of the above and taking note of the imputations of overt acts as regards accused Nos.4, 6 and 7, the petitioner has made out a case for enlarging him on bail.
8. In the result, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail in Crime No.146/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 120-B, 109, 323, 324, 326, 307, 148 and 149 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of `1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with one surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate for the expeditious disposal of the trial.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way any witness.
(iv) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance before the concerned SHO on every date of hearing till trial is concluded.
(vi) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner, shall result in cancellation of bail.
Any observation made herein shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/- JUDGE VGR