IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3722/2019 BETWEEN:
VAJRESH J @ VAJRA @ VAJRESH KUMAR @ VAJJU S/O.LATE GOPI AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/AT NO.48/1, SURVEY NO.193 KASHINAGARA YALACHENAHALLI KANAKAPURA ROAD BENGALURU-560 078 … PETITIONER (BY SRI CHANDRAPPA K.N., ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THALAGATTAPURA POLICE STATION BANGALORE RURAL REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560 001 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI HONNAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON REGULAR BAIL IN CRIME NO.247/2017 (S.C.NO.124/2018) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 144, 147, 148, 120(B), 307, 302 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 25 AND 27 OF THE ARMS ACT AT THALAGATTAPURA POLICE STATION PENDING ON THE FILE OF IX ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.
THE IX ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU HAS REJECTED THE BAIL PETITION ON 28.05.2019 IN S.C.No.124/2018.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondent and perused the records.
2. Petitioner is arraigned as accused no.2 in S.C.No.124/2018 on the file of IX Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District.
3. The allegations against the petitioner is that on 21.08.2017, the deceased Raghu and his friends Madhu, Manu, Manjunath and others proceeded in Ritz Car bearing No.KA-41-B-8357 and visited Ukkada Maramma Temple, Pandavapura Taluk, Mandya District and while they were returning on 22.08.2017 at about 12.10 p.m., accused no.2 and others intercepted the Car and assaulted Raghu and the same was informed to the complainant through his friend. Thereafter, the complainant reached the said spot and found Raghu inside the Car in a pool of blood sustaining various injuries. It is alleged that all the accused have formed into an unlawful assembly and have assaulted the deceased due to which he succumbed to the injuries. Accused no.3 - Lokesh had approached this Court for grant of bail in Crl.P.No.8859/2018. This Court considering the grant of bail to other accused persons i.e. accused nos.4 to 7 granted bail to accused no.3 also. While recording the reasons, this Court has observed that there are eye witnesses to the incident. It is stated at para 4 of the order that recording of statement of eye witnesses has not been mentioned in the remand application of some of the accused. If really there were eye witnesses, he could have recorded the statement of the witnesses at the time of inquest. Therefore, doubting the veracity of eye witnesses version the Court has enlarged accused no.3 also on bail.
4. On perusal of the facts of this case, it is stated that accused no.3 assaulted the deceased with a long on the head. Thereafter, the petitioner has also assaulted the deceased on the head with a long. When the eye witnesses version is not accepted, at this stage, the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt during the course of full fledged trial. When the other accused who stand on the same footing have already been released on bail on the ground of parity, this petitioner is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on some conditions. Hence, the following order:
The petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner shall be released on bail in connection with S.C.No.124/2018 pending on the file of IX Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 120-B, 307, 302 r/w 149 of IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute his personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Two lakh only) with two sureties for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering 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.
(v) The petitioner shall mark his attendance once in a week i.e., on every Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. before the Investigating Officer for a period of two months or till the charge sheet is filed, whichever is earlier.
Sd/-
JUDGE hkh.