Karnataka High Court
Jagadeesh vs State By Handanakere Police on 28 February, 2014
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION No.188/2014
BETWEEN:
1. Jagadeesh,
Aged about 33 years,
S/o. Rajanna,
2. R. Dayandana,
Aged about 29 years,
S/o. Rangaiah,
3. Hemanth Kumar @ Hemanth,
Aged about 23 years,
S/o. Chandraiah,
4. Thippesh @ Thippeswamy
Aged about 22 years,
S/o. Shivanna,
All are R/at,
Dhaavanadhahosahalli Village,
Handanakere Hobli,
Chikkanayakanahalli-572 214. .. PETITIONERS
(By Sri. Vinayakeerthy. M, Adv.)
AND:
State by
Handanakere P.S.,
Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk,
2
Rep. by the SPP,
High Court,
Bengaluru-560 001. .. RESPONDENT
(By Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP)
This criminal petition is filed under Section 438 of the
Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event
of their arrest in Cr. No.82/2013 of Handanakere P.S.,
Tumkur, for the offences punishable under Sections 448,
323, 324, 326, 327 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
This petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court
made the following :
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 4 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking a direction to the respondent police that in the event of their arrest, they be released on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 506, 448, 323, 324, 326 and 327 read with Section 34 of IPC registered in respondent Police Station Crime No.82/2013.
2. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 4 and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. 3
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners, during the course of the arguments, submitted that even from the side of the petitioners also there is a complaint against the complainant and others. He submitted that injured is already discharged from the hospital and the life of the injured is safe. He submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He submitted that by imposing reasonable conditions, the petitioners may be admitted to bail
5. As against this, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State, during the course of the arguments, submitted that out of four injuries sustained by the injured, three injuries are simple in nature and the other injury is grievous in nature. However, he admits that the injured is already discharged from the hospital and he is out of danger.
6. As submitted by learned Counsel appearing for the parties, the injured is already discharged from the hospital and he is out of danger. The offences alleged are triable by 4 the Court of Magistrate and they are not punishable for death or imprisonment for life. Therefore, by imposing reasonable conditions, the petitioners can be admitted to anticipatory bail. The petitioners have made out case of their reasonable apprehension at the hands of respondent police.
7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondent police are directed to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 448, 323, 324, 326 and 327 read with Section 34 of IPC registered in Crime No. 82/2013, subject to the following conditions:
I. Each petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) and shall offer one surety for the likesum to the concerned Magistrate Court.
II. The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for the purpose of interrogation, whenever called upon to do so. III. The petitioners shall not intimidate or tamper with prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.5
IV. The petitioners shall appear before the concerned Magistrate Court within thirty days from the date of this order and shall execute personal bond as well as surety bond.
Sd/-
JUDGE Cs/-