Karnataka High Court
Ramling And Anr vs The State Through on 4 March, 2022
Author: Jyoti Mulimani
Bench: Jyoti Mulimani
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200181 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. RAMLING
S/O MARUTI JAMADAR
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER
2. SRIRANG
S/O SHASHIKANTH KARBARI
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: LABOUR
BOTH ARE R/O
VILLAGE RAMTIRTH (D),
TQ: BASAVAKALYAN
DIST: BIDAR - 585 327. ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SANTOSH PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE THROUGH
MANTHAL POLICE STATION,
TQ: BASAVAKALYAN, DIST: BIDAR
(REPRESENTED BY ADDL. STATE
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
KALABURAGI - 585 105). ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI GURURAJ V. HASILKAR, HCGP)
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO RELEASE THE PETITIONERS
ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.79/2021 OF MATALA POLICE
STATION, TQ. BASAVAKALYAN, DIST. BIDAR IN
C.C.NO.1434/2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDL. CIVIL
JUDGE (JR.DN.) & J.M.F.C. COURT BASAVAKALYAN, DIST.
BIDAR, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 380, 427, 457, 511 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Sri.Santosh Patil., learned counsel for petitioners and Sri.Gururaj V.Hasilkar., learned HCGP for respondent have appeared in person.
2. This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C seeking regular bail in respect of a case registered against the petitioners in Crime No.79/2021 of Matala Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 380, 427, 457, 511 OF IPC.
3. The bail application filed by the petitioners before the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bidar sitting at Humnabad has been rejected. Hence, the 3 petitioners are before this Court seeking bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
4. Sri.Santosh Patil learned counsel for petitioners submits that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are false and baseless. The petitioners are falsely implicated in the case by the police only to meet out harassment.
Next, he submitted that initially FIR was lodged against unknown persons and police during the course of investigation have implicated the petitioners on the basis of suspicion. Suspicion however strong and grave, would not take the place of proof.
A further submission was made that the investigation in the case is completed and charge sheet has been filed to the court. Hence, custodial interrogation of petitioners is not required. It is also submitted that the petitioners were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 17.09.2021. 4 There is no recovery made at the instance of petitioners and nothing is seized from the possession of petitioners.
Lastly, he submitted that the petitioners are young and are sole bread earners of the family. The family of petitioners are facing hardship and misery due to their detention. The petitioners are ready and willing to furnish surety and will abide by the conditions that may be imposed by the Court. Accordingly, he submitted that the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.
5. Learned HCGP submits that during the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer has collected sufficient materials against the petitioners. If bail is granted to the petitioners, there is every chance of their abscondence. They may tamper the witness and cause hindrance in trial of the case. Accordingly, he submits that the petition may be dismissed.
6. Heard, the learned counsel for petitioners and learned HCGP.
5
7. The sum and substance of the prosecution case is that on 13.09.2021 at about 7.00 hours, the Branch Manager of S.B.I Bank situated at Matala received an information from his peon that some unknown persons have break open the shutter and entered the room and have broken the ATM Machine. Soon after receiving the information, the Manager visited the Bank and noticed that the shutter was broken and the ATM Machine was damaged. It was also noticed that the 3 CCTV Cameras worth Rs.20,000/- and Rs.80,000/- was damaged.
On analyzing the footage from CCTV, it was learnt that the incident took place between 1.00 hours to 7.00 hours. As per the footage, two persons entered the ATM Room and have attempted to steal the money from the ATM and in the process, have damaged three CCTV Cameras and ATM Machine. Hence, the Branch Manager was constrained to lodge a complaint with the respondent
- police.
6
The police registered FIR against unknown persons. After completion of the investigation the charge sheet is filed against three accused persons. The petitioners are two among them. The case is registered in Crime No.79/2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 380, 427, 457, 511 OF IPC.
It is stated in the statement of objections that the Investigating Officer has recovered the properties from the possession of accused persons. A careful perusal of the records i.e., the charge sheet depicts that the charges leveled against the petitioners are serious in nature and the offences attempted are serious in nature.
It is well settled that the matters to be considered in an application for bail are whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence; nature and gravity of the charge; absconding or fleeing, if released on bail; character, behavior, means, position and standing of the accused and 7 the most important consideration is likelihood of the offence being repeated.
Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that this is not a fit case to exercise the discretion under Section 439 of CR.P.C at this stage.
Hence, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Srt