Karnataka High Court
Shashikumar @ Shashi vs State Of Karnataka By on 16 July, 2014
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3754 OF 2014
BETWEEN:
SHASHIKUMAR@SHASHI
S/O LATE NATARAJ
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
R/AT # 557, SIDDARTHA COLONY
MADIWALA
BENGALURU-560068.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI H.K.RAJAKUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
MADIWALA POLICE STATION
BENGALURU-560068.
REP. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560001.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI B.J.ESWARAPPA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
439 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENLARGE THE PETITIONER
ON BAIL IN C.C.NO.4379/14 (CR. NO.1217/2013) OF
MADIVALA P.S., BANGALORE CITY, FOR THE OFFENCE
P/U/S 143, 324, 302 R/W 149 OF IPC
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:-
2
ORDER
This is the petition filed by the petitioner/accused No.4 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking his release on bail in Crime No.1217/2013 registered in respondent police station for the offence punishable under Section 307, 323 R/W Section 34 of IPC later on after the death of deceased offence under section 302 of the IPC is also inserted in the case.
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.4 and also heard the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
3. I have perused the averments made in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and other material placed on record. The complaint averments goes to show that on the date of the incident during night the street drama was going on and the sister in law of the 3 complainant was requested to give the electricity connection and accordingly she allowed the persons to have the electricity connection for the said drama. There afterwards, the street boys started to make galata to put the tape-records' according to their choice and when the galata took place the sister-in-law of the complainant disconnected the electricity supply to the street drama then the quarrel took place. When the deceased came there to enquire, there is an allegation that accused Nos.1 to 3 Kalu, Lalu and Dingri assaulted the deceased and caused the bleeding injuries. At the basis of said complaint case has been registered against the said three persons. On the first instance and looking to the allegation made in the complaint and as well as in the FIR registered at the first instance name of the present petitioner has not all figured but subsequently investigating officer has recorded further statement of the complainant wherein the name of the present petitioner was also mentioned that there he was also present along with the accused Nos.1 to 3 and 4 there is also allegation in the further statement against the present petitioner that he also caught hold the deceased, so except this allegation there is no allegation that the present petitioner also assaulted the deceased with any deadly weapon and caused bleeding injuries. Apart from that his name is mentioned only as per the further statement of the complainant at the subsequent stage and not in the original complaint. The accused No.5 and accused No.3 both approached this court seeking their release on bail and this court by order dated 09.06.2014 passed in Criminal No.2855/2014 and in the order dated 24.06.2014 in Criminal No.3425/2014 allowed both the petitions and granted them bail. Looking to the allegation, as against present petitioner he is also similarly placed with that of accused Nos.3 and 5 who have been already granted with bail. Therefore, looking into these materials and on the ground of parity the present petitioner also entitle to the grant of bail.
5
Accordingly, petition is allowed. Respondent- police are directed to release the petitioner/accused on bail in Crime No.1217/2013 registered in respondent police station for the offence punishable under Section 307, 323 R/W Section 34 of IPC later on after the death of deceased offence under section 302 of the IPC were also inserted in the case, subject to following conditions:
1. Petitioner to execute a personal bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) and to furnish one solvent surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court..
2. Petitioner shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
3. Petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court regularly.
Sd/-
JUDGE SM