IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.27305 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
VINOD KUMAR K S/O LATE S. KRISHNA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT NO.12/3, BDA FLATS NANDINI LAYOUT BANGALORE-560 096 …PETITIONER (BY SHRI. B.N. PRITHVI RAJ, ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ASHOK NAGAR POLICE STATION BENGALURU-560 025 REP. BY POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR ... RESPONDENT (BY SHRI. S. RACHAIAH, HCGP) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD.13.12.2018 PASSED BY I ACMM, BENGALURU IN CC NO.32746/2018, AS PER ANNX-A, IN SO FAR AS ISSUANCE OF NBW AGAINST PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.5 IS CONCERNED.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner is accused No.5 in C.C.No.32746/2018, pending trial before the learned 4th Additional CMM, Bangalore. The grievance of the petitioner is that by order dated 13.12.2018, the learned trial judge has issued non-bailable warrant against him and other accused without issuing notice.
2. Shri Prithvi Raj B.N. learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that this Court in writ petitions No.1030-31/2019 filed by accused Nos.7 and 8 in the very same crime number has quashed the proceedings in C.C.No.32746/2018 and directed the learned trial Judge to consider bail applications of the petitioners therein. He further submitted that petitioners would be satisfied if a similar order is passed in this case also.
3. Shri S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP, in his usual fairness does not dispute the facts stated by the learned advocate for the petitioner.
4. I have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the records.
5. This Court in W.P.Nos.1030-31/2019 by order dated 09.01.2019 has allowed the petition by recording thus:
“9. Resultantly, these petitions merit consideration and accordingly they are allowed. The order dated 13.12.2018 in C.C. No.32746/2018 (Annexure-A) pending on the file of I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru insofar as the issuance of Non-bailable Warrants against the petitioners herein (accused No.7 and 8) is set aside.
10. At this stage, Shri Naganand submits that petitioners may be permitted to move the learned Trial Judge to seek regular bail. He further submits that in view of the impugned order, petitioners apprehend that should there is any delay in considering the bail application for want of objections to be filed by the Public Prosecutor, there could be threat of detention, pending consideration of bail application.
11. In the circumstances, it is directed that petitioners shall voluntarily appear before the Trial Court on 18.1.2019 by serving the copy of bail application on the Public Prosecutor two days in advance. The Trial Court shall consider the bail application on the same day and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
12. As prayed for, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to challenge the order taking cognizance of offences by the learned Magistrate, in separate petitions, if they are so advised.
13. The Writ Petitions are allowed with the above observations.”
6. The aforesaid writ petitions were filed by accused No.7 and 8 and petitioner herein is accused No.5 in the very same case. Therefore, the benefit of the above order shall enure to the petitioner also. In the circumstances, the petition is allowed. The order dated 13.12.2018 in C.C.No.32746/2018 passed by the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, insofar as issuance of Non-bailable Warrant against the petitioner is set aside so far as petitioner is concerned. Petitioner shall voluntarily appear before the trial Court by serving the copy of bail application on the Public Prosecutor two days in advance. The trial Court shall consider the bail application on the same day and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Sd/- JUDGE Yn.