IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MAY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV CRIMINAL PETITION No.2529/2019 BETWEEN:
Waseem @ Waseem Akram, S/o. Late: Akram Shariff, Aged about 30 yearws, R/at: Shabbir Nagar, Hunsur, Mysuru District – 577 338. (By Sri. Lethif B., Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka, By Hunsur Town Police Station, Mysuru District, Rep. by SPP, High Court Builidng, Bengaluru – 560 001.
(By Sri. S. Rachaiah, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.33/2019 of Hunsur Town Police Station, Mysuru City for the offence p/u/s 186, 353, 333, 307 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner has filed the petition seeking to enlarge him on bail with respect to his detention in connection with Crime No.33/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 186, 353, 333, 307 of IPC.
2. The case made out in the complaint is that the Head Constable, Hunsur Town Police Station was on duty and when he had gone to execute the warrant issued by the Prl. Sr. Civil Judge, JMFC, Hunsur in C.C. No.329/2016 and when he confronted the accused to accept the summons, and when the accused was asked to come to the police station, he picked up a quarrel with the complainant and a tore his uniform and obstructed the complainant from performing his official duty. It is further stated that accused had threatened the complainant. Subsequently the complaint has been lodged and has led to the arrest of the accused.
3. The petitioner submitted that the offence sought to be made out under Section 353, 307 and 333 of IPC prima facie are not sustainable in so far as there are no records in the charge sheet relating to injuries sustained by the complainant. It is further stated that merely because the complainant was involved in other offences, effort has been made to implicate the petitioner in the present case.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader states that considering the nature of conduct of the petitioner, question of exercising discretionary power and enlarging him on bail would demoralize the Investigating Agency and hence opposes the grant of bail.
5. After having heard the learned counsel on both the sides, it is observed that there is no material relating to inflicting of injuries on the complainant.
There is no prima facie strong material with respect to offence under Section 307 of IPC.
6. At this stage it would not be appropriate to look in to the merits of the matter. Taking note of the fact that charge sheet has been filed and investigation is complete and also noticing that proceedings with respect to bail cannot be construed to be proceeding to punish the petitioner or to ensure that the petitioner remains in custody as he is involved in other criminal cases, it would be appropriate to consider releasing the petitioner on bail.
7. It is to be noted that the learned Sessions Judge has rejected the application of the petitioner by order dated 08.03.2019. The Court had observed that there were reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner had committed offence under Section 307 of IPC and had observed that investigation is still in progress.
8. It is noted that the investigation is now complete and the alleged offence is not punishable with imprisonment for life or death.
9. Taking note of the observations made above, petition is allowed and the petitioner is enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh only) with Two sureties for the likesum before the trial Court.
(ii) The petitioner shall co-operate for expeditious disposal of the trial and he shall be regular in appearance.
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or influence in any way any witness.
(iv) The petitioner shall physically present himself and mark his attendance before the concerned SHO once in fifteen days till the conclusion of trial.
(v) Any violation of the aforementioned conditions by the petitioner, shall result in automatic cancellation of bail.
10. It is also to be observed taking note of the submission of learned High Court Government Pleader that the accused was a serial offender, it is to be observed that if there is any violation of bail conditions in other matters involving the accused, appropriate steps could be taken for cancellation of bail due to violation of bail conditions.
Sd/- JUDGE VBS