Pradeepa @ Tsumani Kitty vs The State Of Karnataka on 15 May, 2018

[Cites 11, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Pradeepa @ Tsumani Kitty vs The State Of Karnataka on 15 May, 2018

Bench: John Michael Cunha

                           1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF MAY, 2018

                       BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA

          CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2749/2018



BETWEEN:

1. Pradeepa @ Tsunami Kitty
   S/o Kalaiah
   Aged about 28 years,
   R/a No.24, Siddaiah Puranik Road,
   Adarsha Layout,
   Basaveshwara Nagara,
   Bangalore - 560 079.

2. Santosh @ Shantha Kumar
   S/o Mahalingam
   Aged about 24 years,
   R/at No.26/7, 4th Cross, 3rd Main,
   Subhedar Palya, N.H.Colony,
   Kalitemple Road, Bengaluru.

3. Arjun @ Muthappa
   S/o Nanaiah
   Aged about 29 years,
   R/a. 147/9, 5th Main,
   5th Cross, Shaktiganapathi Nagar,
   Basaveshwara Nagar,
   Bangalore - 560 079.                 ...Petitioners

(By Sri: Chandramouli H.S., Advocate)
                             2




AND:

The State of Karnataka
By the Police of
Jnanabharathi Police Station,
Bangalore City.
(Represented by the State Public Prosecutor)
                                          ...Respondent
(By Sri.S.Vishwamurthy, HCGP)

      This petition is filed under section 439 of Cr.P.C.,
praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime
No.65/2018 of Jnanabharathi Police Station, Bangalore
City for the offences punishable under Sections 143,
144, 147, 148, 363, 342, 323, 307, 397, 506 read with
149 of IPC.

     This petition is coming on for orders this day, the
Court made the following:

                       ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C on behalf of Accused Nos.2, 3 and 4.

2. Learned HCGP has not filed statement of objections but orally opposed the petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP.

4. The FIR is registered based on the complaint lodged by one Girish alleging that the complainant was working as supplier in Kuteera Park Land Bar and Restaurant. The wife of accused No.1 by name Deepa and one Thoushith were regularly visiting the said Bar and the complainant was serving them on the table. On 25.02.2018 at about 5.30 P.M., both of them had drinks in the Bar and placed an order for meals but in between they walked out of the Bar. It is alleged that on 28.02.2018, the complainant was kidnapped by the accused persons in a car and was unlawfully confined in a farm house of accused No.1. It is further alleged that suspecting that the complainant was carrying on illicit relationship with the wife of accused No.1, he was threatened by showing a pistol.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the incident has taken place on 28.02.2018; but the complaint was lodged only on 4 02.03.2018. The allegations are directed mainly against accused No.1. The entire incident has taken place without any intention to commit the alleged offences. Substantial investigation is completed and therefore, the custody of the petitioners/accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 are not required to be extended.

6. The learned HCGP submits that incriminating evidence has been collected from the possession of the accused and the said material, prima facie, make out the alleged offences and therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for bail.

7. On going through the allegations made in the complaint, it is evident that accused No.1 was suspecting that his wife Deepa was carrying on illicit relationship with the complainant. In the course of the investigation, all the incriminating evidence has been recovered from the possession of the petitioners. Therefore, the custody of the petitioners is not 5 required to be extended. Accordingly, the petition is allowed.

a. The petitioners/accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 are ordered to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) each with one surety each to the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

b. The petitioners/accused Nos.2, 3 and 4

shall appear before the Court or Investigating Officer as and when required; c. The petitioners/accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 shall not threaten or allure the prosecution witnesses in any manner;

d. The petitioners/accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without prior written permission. 6 e. The petitioners/accused Nos.2, 3 and 4

shall mark their attendance in Jnanabharathi Police Station, Bengaluru on the last day of the calendar month until submission of the final report.

Sd/-

JUDGE UN/SN

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court