Karnataka High Court
Rajanna M vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 March, 2014
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1186 OF 2014
BETWEEN:
RAJANNA M
S/O.LATE MUNISWAMAPPA
AGE 49 YEARS
RESIDING AT SURVEY NO.71/1
CHOKKANAHALLI, JAKKURU POST
BANGALORE - 560 064.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI.H.R.ANANTHAKRISHNA MURTHY, ADV.,)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY SAMPIGEHALLI
POLICE STATION BY STATE P.P.
HIGH COURT BUILDING
HIGH COURT
BANGALORE -1.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
438 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER
ON BAIL IN THE EVENT OF HIS ARREST IN CR.NO.14/2014
OF SAMPIGEHALLI P.S., BANGALORE CITY, WHICH IS
2
REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 144, 147,
148, 427, 447, 436, 435 R/W 149 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
This is the petition filed by the petitioner - accused No.1 under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail to direct the respondent - police to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 141, 143, 144, 147, 148, 448, 427, 447, 436 and 435 r/w.Section 149 of IPC registered by the respondent - police in Crime No.14/2014.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner - accused No.1 and also learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of his argument submitted that this Court has 3 already considered the bail petition of accused Nos.2, 3, 7 & 11 and all the four accused persons have been already granted with bail and looking to the allegations made in the complaint they are one and the same and on the ground of parity present petitioner is also entitled to be granted with bail.
4. As against this, learned Government Pleader during the course of his argument submitted that the name of the present petitioner is mentioned in the complaint and there are statement of witnesses also to show the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the alleged offences and hence petitioner is not entitled to be granted with bail.
5. I have perused the averments made in the bail petition and other materials placed on record. This Court while considering the bail applications of accused Nos.2, 3, 7 and 11, considered the merits of the case and ultimately those four accused persons were 4 admitted to bail by the order of this Court. Looking to the allegations made in the complaint, present petitioner is also standing on the same footing as that of four accused persons who were already admitted to bail. Therefore, on the ground of parity, the present petitioner is also entitled to be granted with bail.
6. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The respondent - police is directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 141, 143, 144, 147, 148, 448, 427, 447, 436 and 435 r/w.Section 149 of IPC registered by the respondent - police in Crime No.14/2014, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-
each (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court; 5
(ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly tamper with any of the prosecution witnesses;
(iii) The petitioner shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer for interrogation whenever called for; and
(iv) The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court within thirty days from the date of this order and execute the personal bond and also the surety bond.
Sd/-
JUDGE VMB