IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.1921/2019 BETWEEN:
Venugopal @ Venu S/o Anandappa Aged about 21 years R/at Manzoor layout Maadapatna Haargadde Post Jigani hobli, Anekal Taluk Bangalore Urban District-560 105.
(By Sri.Abhijith.M.M, Advocate) AND:
State of Karnataka by Parappana Agrahara Police Station Bangalore District-560 100 Rep. by Government Pleader High Court of Karnataka Bangalore-560 001.
(By Sri.S.Rachaiah, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.26/2019 of Parappana Agrahara P.S., Bangalore for the offence punishable under Section 394 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner is seeking to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest with respect to the proceedings in Crime No.26/2019 registered for the offence punishable under Section 394 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant was working in Infosys. On 26.01.2019, he had come to attend a function in Bengaluru and when was returning back to Chennai, he had booked a ticket to travel by bus from Bengaluru to Chennai. Further, he had missed the bus and was waiting in front of Audi Service Centre to go to Chennai. It is alleged that at that point of time, one Omni car came where he was standing and driver of the said car has offered him to drop. The complainant was travelled in the said car and after some time he was assaulted, the accused allegedly took all his cash, debit card, credit card, licence and identity card. It is alleged that the complainant was forced to reveal the PIN number of his ATM card and it is further alleged that the accused have withdrawn the amount of Rs.45,000 from various ATM centers. It is also stated that on the subsequent day, at about 8.30 a.m., complainant was abandoned. On the basis of the above facts, complaint was filed, FIR is registered, investigation completed and charge sheet has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that investigation being completed, no case is made out for custodial interrogation against the petitioner. He has further stated that his name is not mentioned in the complaint and he is innocent of the said offence and he is a employee of KPTCL and hence, seeks to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader states that the custodial interrogation is required for the purpose of recovery, as well as, there is necessity to conduct test identification parade and hence, opposes the grant of anticipatory bail.
5. Taking note of the fact that the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed and also noticing that there is already been recovery, proof of offence is a matter for trial. Accordingly, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest. However, necessary conditions is to be imposed on the petitioner to enable the Investigating Authority to take the petitioner into custody for the limited purpose of the recovery and conditions would be imposed on the petitioner to cooperate with the test identification parade.
6. Accordingly, the bail petition filed by the petitioner under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.26/2019 for the offence punishable under Section 394 of IPC, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall appear in person before the Investigating Officer in connection with Crime No.26/2019 within 15 days from the date of release of the order and shall execute a personal bond for a sum of `1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with a surety for the likesum before the concerned court.
(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence in any way, any witness.
(iii) The petitioner shall co-operate with further investigation by appearing before the Investigating Officer as and when he is called upon.
(iv) Petitioner can be taken into the custody for the limited purpose of discovery as stipulated in terms of Section 27 of the Evidence Act.
(v) The petitioner shall cooperate with the test identification parade.
(vi) In the event of change of address, the petitioner to inform the same to the concerned SHO.
(vii) 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 GJM