Karnataka High Court
Madhukumar @ Madhu (A2) vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 April, 2023
-1-
CRL.P No. 2491 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2491 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
MADHUKUMAR @ MADHU (A2)
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
S/O MALLESH, R/AT NO.34
17TH MAIN ROAD
RAGHAVA NAGARA TIMBER LAYOUT
MYSORE ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 026
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI: HARISHA .A.S., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
NANDINI B G AND:
Location: High
Court Of
Karnataka THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY BYATARAYANAPURA POLICE STATION
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE - 560 001
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI: RAHUL RAI .K., HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 439
CR.P.C PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER ON BAIL IN
CR.NO.283/2022 OF BYATARAYANAPURA P.S., BANGALORE FOR THE
OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 307, 341, 323, 324, 504,
506 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE XXXI
ACMM, BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.2859/2023.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
CRL.P No. 2491 of 2023
ORDER
The petitioner-accused No.2 is before this Court seeking grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in Crime No.283 of 2022 of Byatarayanapura Police Station, pending in CC No.2859 of 2023 on the file of the XXXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 341, 323, 324, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), on the basis of the first information lodged by the informant M Aravind Kumar.
2. Heard Sri A S Harisha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K Rahul Rai, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent -State. Perused the materials on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.2. He is innocent and has not committed any offences as alleged. He has been falsely implicated in the matter without any basis. He was apprehended on 25.11.2022 and since then he is in judicial custody. The petitioner has approached this Court in Criminal -3- CRL.P No. 2491 of 2023 Petition No.12553 of 2022 making similar prayer to enlarge him on bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The said petition came to be dismissed vide order dated 31.01.2023. Accused No.3 who is the rowdy-sheeter is already enlarged on bail. The only allegation made against the present petitioner is that, he assaulted the injured with stone, while accused No.1 assaulted with knife and slapped the informant. The investigation has been completed and the charge sheet is also filed. The injured have not taken treatment as inpatient. Under such circumstances, detention of the petitioner in custody would amount to pre-trial punishment. The petitioner is the permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title to the petition and is ready and willing to abide by any of the conditions that would be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to allow the petition.
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposing the petition submitted that serious allegations are made against the petitioner for having committed the offences along with accused Nos.1 and 3. Accused Nos.1 and 3 are the rowdy-sheeters. The informant sustained simple injury, whereas another injured sustained grievous injury. The -4- CRL.P No. 2491 of 2023 petitioner is also having criminal antecedents. Considering all these facts and circumstances, the earlier petition filed by the petitioner came to be dismissed. Now there are no changed circumstances, except filing of the charge sheet by the Investigating Officer. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
5. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:
"Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?"
My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the following:
REASONS
6. The petitioner had filed similar petition in Criminal Petition No.12553 of 2022 which came to be dismissed vide order dated 31.01.2023. While dismissing the petition, it was observed that the informant had sustained cut lacerated injury over his forehead, which corresponds to the allegations made -5- CRL.P No. 2491 of 2023 against the present petitioner that he assaulted with stone. Swaroop Gowda, who is the injured eye witness has also sustained injuries and he was taken to the hospital. The wound certificate pertains to him discloses that he has sustained one grievous injury.
7. It is the specific contention of the prosecution that the petitioner along with accused Nos.1 and 3 who are the rowdy-sheeters committed the offences, while accused No.1 assaulted with knife and slapped the informant, this petitioner had assaulted with stone. Admittedly, the injured is already discharged from the hospital. The charge sheet is filed after completion of the investigation. It is not in dispute that accused No.3 who is the rowdy-sheeter is already enlarged on bail. Under such circumstances, I do not find any reason to detain the petitioner in custody, as the same would amount to infringement to his right to life and liberty. Hence, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail subject to conditions, which will take care of the apprehension expressed by the learned High Court Government Pleader that the petitioner may abscond or may tamper or threaten the prosecution witnesses.
-6-CRL.P No. 2491 of 2023
8. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed.
The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.283 of 2022 of Byatarayanapura Police Station, pending in CC No.2859 of 2023 on the file of the XXXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, on obtaining the bond in a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions:
a). The petitioner shall not commit similar offences.
b). The petitioner shall not threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
c). The petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when required.
If in case, the petitioner violates any of the conditions as stated above, the prosecution will be at liberty to move the Trial Court seeking cancellation of bail.
-7-CRL.P No. 2491 of 2023
On furnishing the sureties by the petitioner, the Trial Court is at liberty to direct the Investigating Officer to verify the correctness of the address and authenticity of the documents furnished by the petitioner and the sureties and a report may be called for in that regard, which is to be submitted by the Investigating Officer within 5 days. The Trial Court on satisfaction, may proceed to accept the sureties for the purpose of releasing the petitioner on bail.
Sd/-
JUDGE *bgn/-