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.3757/2019 BETWEEN:
VENKATESHA @ DALI VENKI AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS S/O LATE NARAYANASWAMY R/AT NO.581, HOSPETE HULIYURDURGA HOBLI KUNIGAL TALUK TUMAKURU-572 123 … PETITIONER (BY SRI SUNIL KUMAR PATEL, ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HULIYURDURGA POLICE HULIYURDURGA KUNIGAL TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 123 REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 001 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI HONNAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.174/2018 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 120-B, 397, 395 AND 201 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE RESPONDENT POLICE, NOW REGISTERED AS CC.NO.86/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT KUNIGAL.
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.1 in Crime No.174/2018 for the offence under Section 392 of IPC. A charge sheet has been laid against five persons for the alleged offences under Sections 397, 395, 201 r/w 120B of IPC.
3. The brief allegations are that on 31.08.2018 at about 9.30 p.m. the accused persons intercepted the way of CW.1 between Santhemavathur and Doddamavathur Village. It is alleged that accused nos.4 & 5 were watching on the side of the road and accused no.1 has put the long on the complainant’s neck and threatened him with dire consequences and snatched one gold chain. The other accused persons have also snatched gold rings from the complainant. On these allegations, a charge sheet came to be filed. It is submitted that accused nos.2 to 5 were already released on bail by this Court and accused no.1 also stands on the same footing.
4. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, accused nos.2, 3, 4 & 5 were watching on the side of the road and accused no.1 is the person who snatched the gold chain from CW.1 though there is no recovery at the instance of accused no.1. The facts and circumstances of the case would show that it is not only the case registered against him but there are as many as 13 cases against him for various offences under Section 379 of IPC and other provisions of IPC. Thus, in my opinion, the petitioner does not stand on the same footing as that of accused nos.2 to 5 as accused no.1 was holding the deadly weapon and put the deadly weapon on the complainant’s neck and snatched the gold chain. Considering the nature of the allegations and pendency of similar type of cases since 2014 against this petitioner, it appears that after taking bail from various cases he may involve in similar type of cases. Therefore, in my opinion, the petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, it is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE hkh.